Re: Wanted: Alternate wording for Law 16Bb1(a)

"Rui Lopes Marques" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.games.bridge.laws
Message-ID <[email protected]>
EBU and Australia, at least, have interpretations of Law 16 where the action of a player is basically defined as LA for the player, period. Does it help? 

 

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Adam Wildavsky
Sent: Tuesday, February 7, 2017 6:23 PM
To: Bridge Laws Mailing List <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [BLML] Wanted: Alternate wording for Law 16Bb1(a)

 

I was asked on BridgeWinners.com: Suppose a player chooses a call suggested over another by UI, and neither is a LA? Has anyone come across such a situation? What would we want the laws to say about it?

 

On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 11:20 AM, Adam Wildavsky <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > wrote:

I like that as well. Or:

 

  "A player may not choose a call or play that is demonstrably suggested over a logical alternative by unauthorized information."

 

On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 9:05 PM, David Grabiner <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > wrote:

The wording I like: "A player may not choose a call or play that is demonstrably suggested by unauthorized information over a logical alternative."  This connects the "over" directly with "logical alternative"; when West doubled instead of passing, was passing a logical alternative?

 

On 2/6/2017 1:01 AM, Adam Wildavsky wrote:

A few people pointed out a logical flaw in the "unless there is no logical alternative" text. Here's a new version based on a suggestion by Andy Bowles: 

 

A player may not choose a call or play that is demonstrably suggested over another by unauthorized information unless the other call or play is not a logical alternative.

 

On Sun, Jul 17, 2016 at 12:26 PM, Adam Wildavsky <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > wrote:

Thanks, Tim! I like it. Laurie Kelso and I are now working up a proposal along these lines.

 

On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 8:53 AM, Timothy N. Hill <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > wrote:

On 2016 Jul 12, at 12:44, Adam Wildavsky <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > wrote:

 

… the WBF LC is now considering …

 

…, the partner may not choose a call or play that could demonstrably have been suggested over another by the extraneous information unless there is no logical alternative.

 

Better. Now

*	delete “over another,”
*	change “could have been” to “is,”
*	change the preceding clause to a separate paragraph stating that extraneous information from partner is  unauthorized, and
*	in this clause change “extraneous” to “unauthorized.”

 

How ’bout this?

 

Extraneous information that may suggest a call or play includes remarks, questions, replies to questions, unexpected* alerts or failures to alert, unmistakable hesitation, unwonted speed, special emphasis, tone, gestures, movements, and mannerisms. Extraneous information from partner is unauthorized.

 

A player may not choose a call or play that is demonstrably suggested by unauthorized information from his partner unless there is no logical alternative.

 

A logical alternative is one that a significant proportion of the class of players in question, using the methods of the partnership, would seriously consider, and some might select.

Tim

-- 
Timothy N. Hill <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >
mobile: +1 781-929-7673 <tel:%2B1%20781-929-7673> , home: +1 781-235-2902 <tel:%2B1%20781-235-2902> 
416 Linden Street, Wellesley Hills, MA 02481, USA
Duplicate Bridge Director
American Contract Bridge League: <http://acbl.org/>
Westwood Bridge Club: +1 781-329-2476 <tel:%2B1%20781-329-2476> , <http://bridgewebs.com/westwood/>
Newton Bridge Club: <http://newtonbridge.com/>

 

 

 

 

_______________________________________________
Blml mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> 
http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml





-- 
David Grabiner 
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>  (permanent Email; put this in your address book)
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>  (valid as long as I am with Verizon)


_______________________________________________
Blml mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> 
http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml

_______________________________________________
Blml mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.