[blml] Profit from irregularities [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

[Jerry Fusselman]

On 2/10/07, richard.hills at immi.gov.au <richard.hills at immi.gov.au> wrote:
> Nigel Guthrie:
>
> >We are especially grateful to Ton Kooijiman for volunteering
> >to collect illustrative examples. IMO, such examples should
> >be *borderline* For example, "this opening 1N bid is legal
> >(by agreement) but if you substituted a nine for a ten, it
> >would be illegal". These are especially useful in cases
> >where a director must use "judgement" rather than apply a
> >metric or decide on simple objective facts.
>
> Isaac Asimov, Foundation:
>
> "A fire eater must eat fire, even if he has to kindle it
> himself."
>
> Richard Hills:
>
> The long-established Nigellic wish that a uniform bidding
> system be prescribed as a worldwide default method in the
> Lawbook is again being floated in Nigel's opinion above.
>
> If there is one thing which Directors do have expertise in,
> it is in using their judgement.
>
> What some Directors would find helpful is advice in Ton's
> appendix as to the _framework_ within which they exercise
> their judgement.  That is, clarification of the step-by-step
> procedures needed to construct a ruling.
>

Can you tell us where Ton's appendix can be seen?

I would rather have a few more rules and a little less discretion.

At a recent ACBL NABC, for example, I was told I had to prealert an
11-13 NT opening, because the range was unusual.  (Inexplicably,
Memphis backed this up as valid director's discretion.)

In the same session, I was also told, when my partner's claim was
contested, that we should all pick up our cards and play the hand out.
 Funny thing, I said, "NO---play ceases" (I hear that that was wrong
of me---too positively stated, blah blah). But a new director was
summoned to do it right---and that director was the one who had
required the prealert.

Yes, directors have experience exercising judgement, but that proves
nothing.  I like Nigel's idea.  Who says it has to be world wide?

-Jerry Fusselman