[BLML] Both players forget
Ziffbridge at t-online.de
Fri Aug 29 14:23:03 CEST 2014
Am 29.08.2014 13:44, schrieb Herman De Wael:
> Matthias Berghaus schreef:
>> That is the question. It has become not so unusual to assign an
>> artificial score if you use a two-suited convention and something
>> happens. The Dutch have done it (don`t know whether they still do), the
>> Austrians have don it (same..), maybe others have, I don`t know. IMO
>> 40C1 is in the rules to let them do it.
> I believe that rule to be against the laws of the game, but I accept it
> in some limited cases, like the Dutch example.
I believe that rule to have been against the laws before 2007, and I
don`t like it now. It makes certain things easier for the TD now, but I
never had any problem with it.
> I believe that a player is allowed to forget his system, and the laws
> guarantee that this does not get punished.
So do I.
> What the Dutch have done is
> to get round this by saying that in specially described situations,
> forgetting a convention is "paying insufficient attention to the game".
> What you are doing is saying, without any prior arrangement, that it is
> forbidden to forget your system twice. Or three times.
Not me. Forgetting your system again and again creates a partnership
experince, at least. Cashing in on that (without proper disclosure) is
what is forbidden.
> Or however many
> you believe is enough to put L40C into action. The problem with that is
> that you fail to say how many times are enough. And the only way you can
> get to know the frequency is when they tell you. So you are punishing
> honest players and leaving potential cheats scot-free.
I know my customers, and exchange data with fellow TDs. They don`t need
to tell me. It is more difficult in areas where I don`t know the playrs,
that is true. But most of the time the players tell me by their actions,
so I don`t have to ask.
> And that cannot be good for the game.
It would not be good, agreed.
More information about the Blml