[blml] Any redress or rub of the green [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

[Herman De Wael]

Sven Pran wrote:
>> On Behalf Of Herman De Wael
> ...........
>>> The CC is a written declaration on your system agreements. 
>>> Do I understand your position correct that a player shall
>>> not be bound by what he has issued in writing to his
>>> opponents on the ground that he has not read it?
>>>
>>> A parallel situation would be that you deny being bound 
>>> by a contract you have signed because you haven't really
>>> read it before signing?
>>>
>>> To me both positions sound ridiculous.
>> Yes, they do.
>> But the first is really not fair: You are using the "contract", that
>> you haven't read, not as something you are bound by, but as something
>> you defend yourself with!
>>
>> In fact what you are doing is this: you are misinforming opponents,
>> and then you take a piece of paper and prove thereby that you have not
>> been lying. When the piece of paper has never been read by the guy
>> making the (supposedly wrong) bid.
>>
>> I don't feel good by that. And I'm looking for something to counter
>> this with. Why are you against me for wanting to have more "honest"
>> bridge being played?
> 
> No, I am not against you on that desire. And as I have already stated
> before: If "overwhelming" evidence is provided to the effect that the CC is
> incorrect I shall also rule accordingly. (The most common situation I know
> for this to occur is when a partnership has changed an agreement but failed
> to correct their CC correspondingly).
> 

There, you see? You will also occasionally rule against the CC being 
correct. OK? So stop criticizing me when I do the same. Or rather, 
Richard does.

> That much said I still consider the CC as the best evidence of the
> agreements whenever there is any doubt and I expect any partnership to treat
> their CC seriously.
> 

Of course, did we ever say anything else?

I fear you have fallen for the same mistake that occurs often on blml, 
Sven. You have picked up on a later message in a thread and assumed 
people were talking generally, when in fact they were talking about a 
particular exceptional case.


-- 
Herman DE WAEL
Antwerpen Belgium
http://www.hdw.be