[blml] Law 25A

[Alain Gottcheiner]

At 11:49 6/08/2006 +0200, Sven Pran wrote:
>I was consulted (on telephone) on a case on which I would like to hear
>opinions on blml, preferably from those that feel themselves competent on
>the application of law 25A:
>
>The auction: (North dealer, bid boxes in use, no screens)
>N    E    S    W
>1C - P - 1D - P
>1H - P - 2S - P
>2NT - P - P - P
>
>Immediately after West's final pass, before any activity associated with the
>opening lead, South exclaims: "God, what have I done" or words to that
>effect.
>
>Facts (undisputed) as established by the Director: 2S is forcing to game
>(4th suit), there is no doubt that South intended to bid game, i.e. 3NT, and
>that his pass as such was "unintended". (I am deliberately avoiding the word
>"inadvertent" here).
>
>Question: Shall South be permitted a Law 25A substitution of 3NT for his
>last pass?
>
>"Disturbing" circumstances:
>
>We have since long practiced a general (but not necessarily absolute) rule
>in Norway that for a call to be considered inadvertent its bid card should
>normally "come" from the same compartment in the bid box as the bid card for
>the intended call. (Pass, Double and Redouble come from one compartment, all
>bids come from a different compartment).
>
>I believe I have heard that Law 25B2(b)(2) was introduced because of a
>situation where a player was so disappointed by his partner's response to a
>Blackwood asking bid that he lost all hopes of slam but "inadvertently"
>passed instead of correcting the contract to 5 in the agreed trumps. At that
>time his mistake shall have been ruled not to qualify for a correction under
>Law 25A?
>
>Comments anybody? (I am deliberately not disclosing my own opinion or the
>ruling actually made except that they do agree).

I consider an inadvertent bid to be (only) the case where the player knew 
what one wanted to bid but happened to blurb or fumble something else. This 
is consistent with the Norwegian jurisprudency Sven mentions. One rather 
common case is that of the player that doubles partner's bid, in lieu of 
pulling the stop card (they are the same color).

L25b2 is there for other cases of unintended bids, i.e. it is obvious that 
the intent of the player was to do something else, but one had a slip of 
the motor system.
According to this classification, I would decide Sven's case along L25b2 
and, yes, it is obvious that the bid was 'unintended'. Let North play 3NT, 
but for limited rewards.

Best regards,

     Alain.