[blml] Breaking the Law (was why ask ?)

[Steve Willner]

From: Alain Gottcheiner <agot at ulb.ac.be>
> And in any case of doubt (ie, Was missing this line an 
> egregious error or not ? Perhaps), I would restore +620.
> 
> If we act otherwise, we would sooner or later encounter a case where 
> declarer played in a strange way to cater for the case where the opponents' 
> action *was* ethical (freak hand), and you'll tell him his line was 
> inferior because it didn't cater for "ordinary" cases, so you don't adjust. 
> This looks pretty wrong.

An old thread, but this is an interesting point.  An example:

South opens 3H.  West doubles in a loud voice, literally pounding his 
fist on the table.  All pass.  Double is labelled "cooperative" on the 
convention card.  Of course most South's play West for the trump stack 
(which he has), but a naive South plays East for the trumps on the basis 
that East's pass would have been illegal otherwise.  Adjust?  For one 
side or both?