[blml] Bid or not? [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

[Herman De Wael]

richard.hills at immi.gov.au wrote:
> Steve Willner:
> 
> [snip]
> 
>> As others have written, I'd be surprised if "2" standing
>> alone is a complete call.  If that's what the regulations
>> say, they need to specify how to determine the denomination.
> 
> ABF Bidding Regulations, clauses 3.1 and 7.1:
> 
>>> 3.1 Players must decide their call before commencing to
>>> write or to touch the bidding box. Any vacillation among
>>> calls may convey unauthorised information and restrict
>>> partner's actions according to Laws 16A and 73C.
>>> .....
>>> 7.1 A call is not made until the player has written the
>>> appropriate numeral, if necessary, with the appropriate
>>> symbol. Each call should be written in the next vacant box
>>> working from left to right of that player's segment of the
>>> bidding slip. The symbols are:
>>>
>>> The numerals 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
>>> C for clubs
>>> D for diamonds
>>> H for hearts
>>> S for spades
>>> NT for no trumps
>>> / for pass
>>> Either / or // for the concluding pass of the auction
>>> X for double
>>> XX for redouble
> 
> Richard Hills:
> 
> My point is that since the ABF has ruled that "2" is not a
> bid, by analogy an ABF Director should rule that a declarer
> who says "the Qu" has not called a card from dummy.
> 
> Steve Willner:
> 
>> In spoken bidding, "Two... no, wait..." is not a call.
> 
> Richard Hills:
> 
> In the absence of a Spoken Bidding Regulation created by
> the sponsoring organisation, Herman De Wael might well
> argue that Steve is begging the question, petitio
> principii.  Given that Herman argues that a declarer's
> request to "play a trump" in a 3NT contract should be
> interpreted as "play a diamond", if that was declarer's
> original intent, Herman may well argue that "Two... no,
> wait..." should be interpreted as a bid of 2D, if that was
> the bidder's original intent.
> 
> 

You should know better than to mix examples from bidding and play.

"Two, no wait" is no more than UI.

"ruff" is a full designation of a card one intends to play. We are 
unsure of how to rule if the intent does not match the literal word, 
but I doubt if many will rule that no card has been played.

Just to prove that one point: If declarer says "ruff" in a spade 
contract, when believing he's playing diamonds - how many of you would 
allow him to play the club 2 now? No-one, yes? So that means a card 
has been played, and all we need to do is to agree on which one it is.

-- 
Herman DE WAEL
Antwerpen Belgium
http://users.skynet.be/hermandw/index.html