Re: 2017 Law 23 - Comparable Call

The 2017 Law 23 (Comparable Call) cross-references a number of other 2017
Laws.

In addition the 2017 Law 26 (Call Withdrawn, Lead Restrictions)
cross-references Law 23, stating that there are not any lead restrictions
if a withdrawn call is replaced by a comparable call. (Although the
Director can still rectify damage via Law 23C.)

Best wishes,

Richard Hills

On Tuesday, March 14, 2017, Richard Hills <[email protected]> wrote:

> LAW 23 - COMPARABLE CALL
>
> A. Definition
>
> A call that replaces a withdrawn call is a comparable call if it:
>
> 1. has the same or similar meaning as that attributable to the withdrawn
> call, or
>
> 2. defines a subset of the possible meanings attributable to the
> withdrawn call, or
>
> 3. has the same purpose (e.g. an asking bid or a relay) as that
> attributable to the withdrawn call.
>
> B. No Rectification
>
> When a call is cancelled (as per Law 29B) and the offender chooses at his
> proper turn to replace the irregularity with a comparable call, then both
> the auction and play continue without further rectification. Law 16C2 does
> not apply, but see C following.
>
> C. Non-Offending Side Damaged
>
> If following the substitution of a comparable call [see Laws 27B1(b),
> 30B1(b)(ii), 31A2(a) and 32A2(a)] the Director judges at the end of the
> play that without the assistance gained through the infraction the outcome
> of the board could well have been different, and in consequence the
> non-offending side is damaged, he shall award an adjusted score [see Law
> 12C1(b)].
>

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