[BLML] Both players forget

Sven Pran svenpran at online.no
Fri Aug 29 12:29:15 CEST 2014


Sorry Herman, but this doesn't make sense:
When a misbid or deviation becomes so frequent (Law 45C1)  that it actually
becomes an implicit partnership understanding it must be disclosed as such.
And the regulations on which partnership understandings are legal and which
are not does not distinguish between explicit and implicit understandings.

The consequence is that if an implicit partnership understanding (caused by
frequent misbids or deviations) violates any regulation on legal
understandings, the fact that it is the result of misbids or deviations
rather than being an explicit understanding is irrelevant. The only
important factor is that it has indeed become a partnership understanding.

 Sven

> -----Opprinnelig melding-----
> Fra: blml-bounces at rtflb.org [mailto:blml-bounces at rtflb.org] På vegne av
> Herman De Wael
> Sendt: 29. august 2014 11:32
> Til: Bridge Laws Mailing List
> Emne: Re: [BLML] Both players forget
> 
> I disagree with the last paragraph:
> 
> Sven Pran schreef:
> >
> > [Sven Pran]
> > I agree with Richard. Note from Law 40C1:
> >
> > Repeated deviations lead to implicit understandings which then form
> > part of the partnership's methods and must be disclosed in accordance
> > with the regulations governing disclosure of system.
> >
> 
> Note the word "deviations". I consider that to mean slight changes, not
> complete forgettings like the 3C discussed in this thread.
> 
> > This IMHO cannot be understood other than that the implicit
> > understandings (as well as other understandings) are subject also to
> > regulations on legality.
> >
> 
> Indeed it should. But this is with a use of deviations as above.
> 
> > We have had some similar cases: A partnership deviating their weak 1NT
> > opening range from 10HCP (which is legal) down to "good" 9HCP (which
> > is
> > illegal) was told to stop it under threat of being disqualified from
> > the event for using HUM.
> >
> 
> Allow me to illustrate why I believe there is a very important difference
> between the two cases:
> 
> - when a pair describe their agreement as 10-12, and they open it with 9
points,
> they could be guilty of misrepresentation. The system is actually 9-12 and
> should be described as this. The responses to a systemic 9-12 would be the
> same as a 10-12.
> - when a pair describe their agreement as showing diamonds and hearts, and
> they then do it with clubs (weak), there can be no misrepresentation. It
would
> be ludicrous to play a system in which 3Cl shows either clubs or diamonds
and
> hearts, and the answers to such a system (if it could be played) would be
totally
> different than the answers to a simple 5/5 red.
> 
> So the first is a deviation, and the second is a misbid.
> The deviation is actual system and is subject to system regulation and
> misexplanation.
> The misbid can only be subject to misexplanation as to the frequency of
the
> occurence.
> 
> Do you see the difference?
> 
> Herman.
> 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Blml mailing list
> > Blml at rtflb.org
> > http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Blml mailing list
> Blml at rtflb.org
> http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml




More information about the Blml mailing list