[blml] Appeals Committees at ACBL NABCs

[Eric Landau]

At 11:50 AM 7/5/06, Sven wrote:

> > On Behalf Of Eric Landau
> >
> > The current policy for NABC+ appeals requires that a TD be present or
> > "readily available" to advise the AC on points of law or regulation;
> > this is the existing mechanism for insuring that committees have "the
> > requisite technical knowledge".  The actual "business" of the voting
> > members of the committee is supposed to be to determine the answers to
> > questions as to either (a) what really happened (fact), or (b) what
> > would (might) have happened if... (bridge judgment).
>
>And not to forget questions like:

Sure, there are lots of them.  But they all pertain to either (a) or (b).

>Is a particular line of play irrational or inferior?

We need to decide this because TFLB instructs us to consider inferior 
plays but not irrational plays in determining what might have happened.

>Has there been illegal use of extraneous information from partner?

That's a question of fact -- was there EI from partner? -- and a 
question as to what might have happened -- might he have bid 
differently without the EI?

>Has a competitor been damaged by misinformation from opponents?

Another question as to what might have happened -- what would (might) 
he have done with correct information.

>This list can be extended ad lib.

Yup.  But everything legimately on that list will come down to findings 
as to fact or bridge judgment, rather than as to law or regulation.


Eric Landau                     ehaa at starpower.net
1107 Dale Drive                 (301) 608-0347
Silver Spring MD 20910-1607