[blml] Fwd: Re: agreements

[Robert Geller]

>>At 00:00 12/10/2006 +0900, Robert Geller wrote:
>>>I don't think this is a laws question.  Rather the answer depends on
>>>the alerting regulations set up by the particular sponsoring organization.
>>
>>Not really. The problem is not in the alert (a cue-bid is ofrten 
>>considered self-alerting), but rather in the explanation. So I'll rephrase 
>>it : "when explaining a bid -yours or his-, are you allowed -perhaps 
>>compelled- to assume "standard" is the agreement" ?

The laws say nothing about this.  Whether or not (and how) you have
to explain this is subject to the procedures set up by the sponsoring
organization.   If you're in Warsaw and you open 1C it's sufficient just
to say "Polish club" (if that's what it is), but in other parts of the world
you need to go into detail.

The general principle of full disclosure of agreements is valid everywhere 
but each sponsoring organization or national federation sets up its
own rules for how the disclosure is to be made. 

In the case of the Belgian natural 3C what are the procedures for explaining
this (alert regulations) set up by the national federation of Belgoum?

-Bob