Re: Indexing, The Art of
Jan Peach <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.games.bridge.laws |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
------ Original Message ------ On Tuesday, 7 Mar, 2017 At 10:48 AM, Richard Hills<[email protected]> wrote: Jan Peach: [big snip] I don't see that being a contested auction or uncontested makes any difference. Richard Hills: In an uncontested auction the non-bidding side does not need to know an accurate explanation of the opposing partnership understandings until the Clarification Period. (Although one Futile Willie has argued that he wants to ask a question whenever it is his turn to call. This approach might be an infraction of the new 2017 Law 20G2, which prohibits a player from asking a question when his sole intent is to elicit an incorrect explanation.) Best wishes, Richard Hills An auction may be uncontested because at least one pass is based on the misinformation. Do offenders now choose what opponents need to know? I can see that they might not want opponents to benefit from having both the wrong and right explanation but should the laws be helping offenders so much? I have snipped everything below as my response has bounced twice. Jan _______________________________________________ Blml mailing list [email protected] http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml