[blml] Encrypted signals

[richard willey]

On 9/6/06, Alain Gottcheiner <agot at ulb.ac.be> wrote:
> At 18:41 29/07/2006 -0400, you wrote:
>
>
> >The ACBL Conventions Committe refuses to approve ANY defense to a 1D
> >opening showing 4+ Hearts. <snip> Members of the ACBL Conventions
> >Committee claim that its impossible to construct and adequate defense
>
> This is ridiculous.
>
> Use the same defense as you do against a 1H Acol opening (or rather Blue
> Team 1H opening, which it is closer to), and give 1H any meaning you want.
> Is that *so* difficult ?

You won't get much argument here, but please recall the original discussion.

A number of the members of this list are highly critical of the ACBL
regulatory structure.  More specifically, I believe that ACBL
regularly applies the laws in an arbitrary and inconsistent manner. I
was merely providing an example.

I'll go a step further.  I believe that the ACBL regulations are
deliberately vague in order to maximize discretionary power.
Personally, I find this highly problemic.  I'd prefer rule of law to
whims of individuals.





-- 
"It's no disgrace not to be able to run a country nowadays, but it is
a disgrace to keep on trying when you know you can't"

Will Rogers