[blml] Profit from irregularites

[Sven Pran]

> On Behalf Of Nigel
.............
> Also, some might argue that you don't always need an *agreement* to take
> advantage of an opponent's infraction. Suppose, for example: Your normal
> agreement is to play take-out doubles over pre-ements. LHO opens 3H, out
> of turn. The director tells partner his options and  he elects to accept
> the  opening bid and double.  IMO, that is likely to be penalties. Not
> by convention or agreement. Just *general bridge knowledge*. I assume
> that this is one of Eric Landau's "interesting possibilities".

The laws are already crystal clear here: Once partner has accepted this
opening bid out of turn it is to be treated as if it were legal; that is as
if LHO was in fact the dealer. So your agreements on doubles over pre-empts
obviously apply, and if you have any other understanding with your partner
on the double in this case that will be a concealed partnership
understanding.

Sven
 
> IMO,  the only simple legal counter to such agreements is to remove the
> options; but  I agree with Eric: such a solution creates its own
> problems, perhaps including more director calls.
> 
> It is important that the *new edition of the laws* makes it crystal
> clear whether such conventions are legal. Otherwise, *secretary birds*
> who currently use them will continue to enjoy an advantage over other
> players who haven't considered the possibilities or regard them as
> illegal or unsporting.
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> blml mailing list
> blml at amsterdamned.org
> http://www.amsterdamned.org/mailman/listinfo/blml