[blml] Marvin French's Procedures for handling UI - part one [SEC=UNOFFICIA

[Tim West-Meads]

Ed wrote:
 
> Um. I accept that is current (and possibly past, though I have no  
> experience there) practice. But... The law says "the partner may not  
> choose from among logical alternative actions one that could  
> demonstrably have been suggested over another by the extraneous  
> information." That "from among logical alternative actions" says to  
> me that the suggested action must be logical. In fact, it says to me  
> that if a player chooses an action that is not a member of the set  
> "logical alternative actions", he has done nothing illegal.

As has been argued here before "Among the white sheep were a goat and a 
black ram - when asked to choose his favourite animal the farmer 
selected the goat."

For Goat read "Illogical Alternative", for black ram read "Suggested LA" 
for sheep read "Non-suggested LAs".  Thus it is linguistically possible 
to select an IA from among LAs.  This interpretation is consistent with 
the words of L16a2 "When a player has substantial reason to believe that 
an opponent who had a logical alternative..".  It is the existence of 
LAs which matters - not the logicality of the selected action.  Only 
white sheep are legal!

Tim