[blml] New L27 (again)

[Tony Musgrove]

As I have mentioned previously, I am now using the new
laws and trying to get my spiels right.

I never had any trouble with the old L27, although some
players were probably excecuted who would now get off
under the new rules.  For example:

I was playing today as a fill in.  I opened 1NT (strong) and
LHO bid 1C, immediately saying, "Oh, I didn't see you bid",
and replaced the 1C by double before I could say anything.
My partner rejected the 1C insufficient bid, so under the old
rules I would have barred the 1C's partner, since 1C is of the
form:   could be a short as 2.
Upon reflection, I allowed the alteration to double in the case
in question, since their system calls a double of 1NT as "optional".
I suppose that means that it incorporates all the meaning of
1C (I can open the bidding partner).  I am a bit uneasy about
this ruling since I would not have offered the chance of doubling
had I been called to the table under normal circumstances.

Still awaiting some definitive ruling on this and other previous
cases

Confused
(Sydney)