Re: Indexing, The Art of

 
Where do you get 50% from, Richard?
"Becomes aware of his own mistake" sounds like a 100% mistake and I 
don't readily see why opponents shouldn't be told immediately about 100% 
mistakes, as a "must do".
Far better to get normal table results than leaving it to the director 
later.
Some additional waffle for when a player is merely wondering whether he 
has gotten it wrong is no doubt fine but I can't read that into the 
current wording.
I don't see creation of UI as the big problem. The problem with saying, 
eg, "I said it was weak spades but I might be wrong and it's hearts and 
clubs," is that the opponents can't know whether partner is calling over 
weak spades or hearts and clubs. I agree better to keep quiet if not 
100% sure of an error.
Jan  
------ Original Message ------
On Sunday, 5 Mar, 2017 At 1:23 PM, 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