[blml] Online Bridge

[Tim West-Meads]

Steve wrote:

> The key point -- which L40B tells you -- is that the 
> improperly-disclosed call is itself illegal. 

Personally I would only rule the opening bid *itself* illegal if the 
bidder had made the call knowing it had been (or would be) improperly 
disclosed (particularly germane in cases where proper disclosure would 
render the bid illegal under SO L40D regs).  In cases where the bidder 
believes that the bid *will* be properly disclosed "in accordance with 
the regulations of the sponsoring organisation" my ruling will be based 
on damage to the NOS from the improper disclosure rather than illegality 
of the bid itself.  If you wish you may assume I'm doing this on the 
basis that bidder has a "reasonable expectation" that the bid will be 
understood by opponents when his partner makes the anticipated 
alert/announcement/explanation (or opps look at his CC).

I acknowledge that this isn't exactly what L40b says but it's an 
approach that hasn't given me any problems (and seems a reasonable 
interpretation of what the various disclosure regulations are trying to 
achieve).

Tim