[blml] Your call

[Jean-Jacques Lafay]

Karel a écrit :
> " .... As I said, I would bid 6NT over 3H, but probably not over 2H
> corrected
> to 3H. "
> 
> +++ and that is exactly my point.  There is a conflicit in the laws in this
> case.  One Law 16 is telling you to bid on "normally" ignoring any
> extraneous information available which could divert you from a normal
> action.  Another law 27B is saying its ok to have information available when
> Pd corrects a misbid legally to a level higher even though this information
> WILL almost certainly effect your call had that misbid not happened.

Well, hardly a conflict : there is a general rule and an explicit 
exception :-)

> Any cognitent pair with sufficient knowledge of the laws could have a field
> day with the implications here.  Playing devils advocate - you could
> deliberately misbid in "dodgy" cases, correct the call and pd is now happy
> as larry with the extra info ... and its all legal.

This is exactly where 27A1b kicks in ! When the IB (+ the correction + 
the knowledge that the resulting bid was a correction) allowed you to 
achieve a result that would possibly (or probably, that's not in TFLB) 
be missed without any irregularity in the first place (ie no IB), the 
director may adjust.

> If you are going to bid 6NT over 3H's why do you change your mind over 2H
> corrected to 3H ... ??  They are the same auction.  No they SHOULD be the
> same auction - but currently arent.

Why should they ?
When there has been an irregularity, the laws often strive to keep the 
hand playable whenever possible. Among the workarounds, there are cases 
where one player is barred, and in this case his partner must take a 
shot at what could be a playable spot, not an easy guess. In the 
specific case of IB, the alternative is to allow the correction (when it 
is not conventional, bla bla bla) *and* to allow the information. There 
is often still a lot of guesswork involved during the auction, but the 
hand remains mostly playable. If the information were unauthorized, 
quite often the mere correction would be too risky, and the player would 
probably be better off just guessing the final contract (barring his 
partner). This is of course a possibility, but one that is further from 
"real" bridge than the one currently in place, therefore I don't think 
it would be an improvement (moreover, you would have to investigate use 
of UI on *all* IB corrections)...

Jean-Jacques
--