[blml] Encrypted signals (was: nearest card)

[Adam Beneschan]

> from Grattan Endicott
> grandeval at vejez.fsnet.co.uk
> [also gesta at tiscali.co.uk]
> ************************************
> "Say, from whence you owe
> this strange intelligence?"
>                      (Macbeth 1.sc3)
>  -----------------------------------------------
> +=+ The point about Multi is interesting. The convention 
> was devised at a time when the laws said simply 'meaning',
> not 'full meaning'. It is in use now because SOs have used
> L40D to permit something that had become an ingrained
> practice before the law changed. In view of the precedent 
> one should not argue if an SO allowed encrypted signals 
> by 40D regulation.
>                                ~ Grattan ~   +=+

I can't believe you made this argument.  Multi may have been around a
long time, but what about the myriad of other conventions that show an
unknown suit that have been invented more recently?  In Cappelletti, a
2C overcall over 1NT shows a single unknown one-suiter.  Similarly,
several of the bids in DONT show one unknown suits, and the way Bergen
invented the convention, a 2NT overcall shows a strong major-minor
two-suiter where neither suit is known.  So to argue that Multi is a
special case because it was old enough to be "grandfathered" in when
the wording of the Laws changed, just doesn't make any sense.

                                -- Adam