[blml] Amnesia

[Tim West-Meads]

Probst wrote:

> YAY! I've just got there. The Probst Cheat becomes presumed declarer 
> and takes 1st shot at his own contract, then explains partner's 
> failure to alert. 

Then the "Probst Cheat" is an idiot.  If he corrects "too late" for a 
roll-back (an infraction) we give OS an adjusted score which is the 
worse of the worst possible rollback result and the actual table result.
If he does the normal thing he gets the score eventually achieved at the 
table.

> I still 
> stromgly believe that there has been no Opening lead, and we can back 
> the auction up if there was a failed alert.

I can't understand the desire to back up the auction.  NOS are 
guaranteed full protection had such back-up been possibly to their 
advantage.  Declarer has made a mistake and should be prepared to pay 
the price.  Basically if I'm NOS I think you are making things a lot 
harder for *me* by making me assess whether I'm better off rolling back 
the auction with an opposing penalty card to factor in on top of all the 
confusion.  OK, what you want to do is legally plausible - but what I 
want to do is, IMO, both legally plausible and NOS friendly.

Tim