[blml] Law 24 [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

[richard.hills at immi.gov.au]

Grattan Endicott:

>There are a number of places in the law book
>where the player is given options following an
>irregularity; I see no reason why it should
>not be so here - the player may think it of
>possible advantage to himself in the play of
>the hand, or socially in some environments,
>and I have no quibble with that. Indeed it is
>my opinion that where alternatives are
>possible players should be given opportunity
>to judge their own advantage as often as may
>be following an opponent's infraction.
>                         ~ Grattan ~   +=+

Richard Hills:

Declarer currently has five options when an
opening lead out of turn occurs.  Michael
Rosenberg has advocated that declarer be
given a sixth option, that declarer be
entitled to request that the OLOOT be
withdrawn with no penalty, but that any
information from the OLOOT would be
unauthorised to the OLOOTer's partner.

If this additional option for declarer was
adopted for OLOOTs, then it could be
generalised to all penalty cards.

Declarer could be given the option to,
whenever a penalty card occurs, request
that no penalty applies to a penalty card,
but information from the withdrawn penalty
card was unauthorised.


Best wishes

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