[blml] Borderline rulings [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

[richard.hills at immi.gov.au]

Nigel Guthrie:

[snip]

>[D] Concealed understandings: Your notes describe
>the double of a club splinter as asking for a
>diamond lead. You are vulnerable against not. RHO
>opens 1S, LHO splinters 4C and partner doubles.
>You don't alert but when opponents reach a slam,
>you find the killing diamond lead. You and partner
>both claim that double of 4C just shows clubs.
>
>This example is based on a real case where the
>director ruled against the slam-bidders and the
>appeals committee condemned their appeal.

[snip]

Richard Hills:

Please cite identifying details of the real case
concerned.  My elephantine memory suggests that
the real case was an ACBL appeal written up in a
recent ACBL casebook, but that your summary either
inadvertently or perhaps deliberately ("based on")
distorted what actually happened in the real case.

And, of course, in non-distorted real bridge it is
fully illegal, not borderline illegal, to lie
about your partnership agreements.


Best wishes

Richard James Hills, amicus curiae
National Training Branch
02 6225 6285