[blml] Profit from irregularites

[Tim West-Meads]

Eric wrote:
>  So you do what makes sense in the context 
> of the hand, "not by convention or agreement[;] just *general bridge 
> knowledge*", and hope your partner's application of "general bridge 
> knowledge" more or less parallels your own.  

That can be true but I think the reason many of us have actual 
agreements in these situations is because we have encountered similar 
infractions and one us has said "You would have taken a double as 
penalty?", or indeed we doubled on bridge logic and discovered that 
partner was indeed on the same wavelength.  I have no doubt that such 
agreements are disclosable.

There may be a small number of pairs who have actually trawled through 
their entire system and made specific adaptations for insufficient bids 
etc. but I think those are in a tiny minority compared to those who have 
had relevant 5 second conversations after an auction like 1S-(1H)-Xneg 
to the effect that awaiting a correction to 2H and doubling would now be 
for penalties.

Tim