[blml] Law 25A [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

[richard.hills at immi.gov.au]

Kojak:

>25B came about because Edgar (l990 Geneva, WBF) did not see his
>partner's opening of 1 spade on the bidding tray (screens in use-
>tray not fully passed across) and passed with 10 HCPs 4 spades, and
>a singleton.  When the tray was moved after his opponent had passed,
>he discovered his MISTAKE.  He now wanted to change his call, and
>the TD, in consultation with me, said no.
>
>This was protested to a committee of Rules and Regulations sitting
>jointly with the Laws Committee, since it addressed a matter of
>application of Laws and Regulations. The committee upheld the TD
>ruling.
>
>Thereafter we now were faced with the "Bandaid" change of 25B

[snip]

Richard Hills:

I agree with Kojak that the "Bandaid" Law 25B should be abolished in
the next edition of the Laws.

However, Kojak incorrectly implies that Law 25B was introduced into
the 1997 Lawbook as a consequence of Edgar's 1990 experience.

Actually, Law 25B first appeared in the 1987 Lawbook and then was
slightly modified in the 1997 Lawbook.  It was because Law 25B
already existed in 1990 that Edgar launched his protest at the WBF
Geneva event.  And the only reason that Edgar's protest was
unsuccessful was that the WBF had sensibly created Conditions of
Contest for Geneva which limited the scope of Law 25B when screens
were in use.

Edgar argued that screen regulations created pursuant to Law 80
could not over-ride another Law of Bridge, Law 25B.  The Laws
Committee decided otherwise.


Best wishes

Richard James Hills, amicus curiae
National Training Branch
02 6225 6285