[blml] Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

[Grattan Endicott]

from Grattan Endicott
grandeval at vejez.fsnet.co.uk
[also gesta at tiscali.co.uk]
****************************
"The best words in the best order"
                          ~ S T Coleridge.
''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ed Reppert" <ereppert at rochester.rr.com>
To: "Bridge Laws Mailing List" <blml at rtflb.org>
Sent: Monday, April 02, 2007 2:28 AM
Subject: Re: [blml] Nobody expects the Spanish 
                    Inquisition [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]


> > {Nigel]
> > I've made similar proposals in BLML: that if a 
> > pair adopt an untrammelled *standard system* 
> > convention card (or one with deletions but no 
> > additions) then they should not be penalised for  
> > misinformation; but it is even better to allow them 
> > to consult the card, as Richard suggests.
> 
>   (Ed)
> "A pair" is not the same thing as "players in a novice 
> tournament".
> 
+=+ What would be the reaction if a Law 40E1 regulation 
were to allow a player to consult his own convention card 
when answering an opponent's question? (It would call for 
a literal interpretation of L40E2.)
                          ~ Grattan ~   +=+