Indexing, The Art of

The movies Sliding Doors and Groundhog Day are fantasies whose core concept
is the idea, "Small changes can cause dramatically different outcomes."

Likewise the 2017 Drafting Committee inserted a small change into Law 91
(Penalize or Suspend), replacing "contestant" with "player or contestant",
thus granting the Director more flexibility. For example, this permits the
Director to disqualify** a cheat while permitting their entirely innocent
partner to continue play with an authorised substitute.

Best wishes,

Richard Hills

** subject to approval from the Tournament Organizer

On Sunday, March 5, 2017, Richard Hills <[email protected]> wrote:

> The 2007 Law 23 (Awareness of Potential Damage) was poorly located in the
> 2007 Lawbook. It applied to both the auction and play, but it was nestled
> amongst auction-only Laws. So in 2017 the Awareness of Potential Damage has
> been renumbered Law 72C.
>
> To quote Eeyore, this move created a Useful Pot of empty space. Cunningly
> the 2017 Drafting Committee filled the Law 23 casual vacancy with the new
> concept of Comparable Call. This idea dramatically simplifies a Director's
> task in ruling on insufficient bids (and also in ruling on calls
> out-of-rotation).
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Richard Hills
>
> On Sunday, March 5, 2017, Richard Hills <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> The 2017 Drafting Committee created a number of improvements to Law 75.
>> Two of these that I particularly like are:
>>
>> 1. The 2017 Law 75 specifically states that in a case of Misinformation
>> the Director may unearth evidence that the offending side has "no agreed
>> meaning" about a misexplained call; if so the Director can adjust the score
>> if the non-offending side was damaged by not receiving the correct "no
>> agreed meaning" explanation.
>>
>> 2. The 2007 Law 20F4 stated that a player MUST summon the Director
>> IMMEDIATELY that player realises that their own earlier explanation was
>> erroneous.
>>
>> But what if a player is only 50% confident that their own second thoughts
>> are more correct than their own initial explanation? To prevent giving
>> unnecessary UI to partner, the 2017 Law 75 (and the 2017 Law 20F4) now
>> permits the player to defer summoning the Director to correct their
>> own possibly erroneous explanation until the Correction Period. The player
>> retains the option to summon the Director earlier (plus if the player
>> belatedly realises their own misexplanation after the expiry of the
>> Correction Period, then they must summon the Director immediately then).
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>> Richard Hills
>>
>> On Saturday, March 4, 2017, Richard Hills <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Tony Musgrove:
>>>
>>> Exactly, POTUS is a good joke.  As was the Kaplan L25.
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>> Richard Hills:
>>>
>>> The 2007 Drafting Committee deleted Kaplan's ridiculous Law 25B,
>>> replacing it with a more sensible clause.
>>>
>>> The 2017 Drafting Committee has further enhanced the clarity of Law 25
>>> (and Law 45C4(b)) by limiting the scope of "unintentional". A call (or
>>> designation of dummy's card) based on loss of concentration is now deemed
>>> intentional.
>>>
>>> Best wishes,
>>>
>>> Richard Hills
>>>
>>> On Friday, March 3, 2017, Tony Musgrove <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Exactly, POTUS is a good joke.  As was the Kaplan
>>>>
>>>> L25.  There should be more examples of how to
>>>>
>>>> apply some of the Laws, always promised but
>>>>
>>>> never delivered (except some from Max Bavin)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Tony (Sydney)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *From:* [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] *On
>>>> Behalf Of *a.witzen
>>>> *Sent:* Friday, 3 March 2017 3:17 PM
>>>> *To:* Bridge Laws Mailing List
>>>> *Subject:* Re: [BLML] Indexing, The Art of
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On the contrary, there should be more jokes in this forum, such as
>>>> beerfines in the lawbook for calls without merit.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Anton
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Verzonden vanaf Samsung-tablet.
>>>>
>>>> A.witzen, boniplein 86 amsterdam
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -------- Oorspronkelijk bericht --------
>>>> Van: Michael Holmes <[email protected]>
>>>> Datum: 03-03-2017 04:34 (GMT+01:00)
>>>> Aan: Bridge Laws Mailing List <[email protected]>
>>>> Cc: Richard Neville <[email protected]>, Rebecca Plush <
>>>> [email protected]>, Rebecca Plush <[email protected]>
>>>> Onderwerp: Re: [BLML] Indexing, The Art of
>>>>
>>>> Richard,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I don't find your joke funny!  Further, I don't think this is the forum
>>>> for this!  I love the game of bridge like the rest of you!  Let's keep it
>>>> to bridge.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Mike Holmes
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dr. Michael Holmes P.O. Box 56 Dumont, CO 80436 303 928-9187
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> *From:* Richard Hills <[email protected]>
>>>> *To:* Bridge Laws Mailing List <[email protected]>
>>>> *Cc:* Richard Neville <[email protected]>; Rebecca Plush <
>>>> [email protected]>; Rebecca Plush <[email protected]>
>>>> *Sent:* Thursday, March 2, 2017 6:45 PM
>>>> *Subject:* [BLML] Indexing, The Art of
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In my penultimate draft of the Index to the 2017 Laws of Duplicate
>>>> Bridge I included this joke:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> POTUS
>>>>
>>>> See Trump
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In the ultimate draft I deleted the joke because it was irrelevant to
>>>> the fabulous Lawbook. Likewise the American voters will delete the
>>>> irrelevant joke in four years' time.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Best wishes,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Richard Hills
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Blml mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
>>>>
>>>>

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