[blml] Tie me kangaroo court, sport [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

[gesta at tiscali.co.uk]

Grattan Endicott<gesta at tiscali.co.uk
[also grandeval at vejez.fsnet.co.uk]
*****************************************
"The true genius is a mind of large general
powers, accidentally determined to some
particular direction."
                      ~ Dr. Samuel Johnson.
=====================================
+=+ In the WBF regulations there is a clear prohibition of
a player's touching the bidding box 'until he has determined
his call'. Unless I have overlooked something the European
regulations fail to include such words, and perhaps should
be improved. An action is only an infraction if it contravenes
law or regulation and the question should be asked in the
light of the regulations appertaining to the tournament.
       Touching the bidding box when not making a call is in
any event an extraneous action and may be the source of UI.
                                         ~ Grattan ~  +=+
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <richard.hills at immi.gov.au>
To: <blml at rtflb.org>
Sent: Sunday, October 01, 2006 3:16 AM
Subject: Re: [blml] Tie me kangaroo court, sport [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]


> Robert Geller:
>
> [snip]
>
>>>The warning to partner is not authorized information.
>>>Had it not been for the UI partner would have committed
>>>an irregularity,
>
> [snip]
>
> Ton Kooijman:
>
>>If north has to call and south picks a card form his
>>box, regardless what kind of card it is and how he keeps
>>it, may be he just touched it even, this action is an
>>irregularity. And any player at the table may call
>>attention to it, at any stage.
>
> Richard Hills:
>
> Ye, I agree with Ton.  In my opinion, Robert Geller has
> misinterpreted the concept of unauthorised information
> from partner.
>
> Under Law 16A, extraneous information from one partner is
> defined as UI when it will assist the other partner in
> choosing amongst logical alternatives.  An irregularity is
> never a logical alternative.
>
> On the other hand, suppose that in Ton's example North
> said: "Don't bid out of turn pard; this is the first time
> this session that I've held a slam-try hand."
>
> It would be AI to South that it was North's turn to call.
>
> However, if in the North-South system it was undiscussed
> whether North's next call of 4H was a forcing splinter bid
> agreeing spades, or a natural signoff in hearts, then it
> would be UI to South that North was expecting South to bid
> again.
>
>
> Best wishes
>
> Richard James Hills, amicus curiae
> National Training Branch
> 02 6225 6285
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> blml mailing list
> blml at amsterdamned.org
> http://www.amsterdamned.org/mailman/listinfo/blml