[blml] Protecting yourself after failure to alert[SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

[David Grabiner]

Richard Hills writes:

> Jerry Fusselman asked:
>
> [big snip]
>
>>Where in the book does it say when to call the director
>>as MI gradually becomes more and more likely?
>
> Law 11A:
>
> The right to penalise an irregularity may be forfeited if
> either member of the non-offending side takes any action
> before summoning the Director. The Director so rules when
> the non-offending side may have gained through subsequent
> action taken by an opponent in ignorance of the penalty.

In the example I gave in another post (MI corrected after the final pass, TD 
not called), the NOS could have reopened the auction, and accepted the 
consequences, good or bad.  By not reopening the auction and calling the TD 
later, the NOS avoided the risk of reopening the auction.  (If the reopened 
auction would be bad for the NOS, they wouldn't call the TD at all.)

The TD could deny such an adjustment even though the exact wording of L11A 
(which is not exclusive) did not apply.  The NOS gained because their own 
actions changed the penalty to their advantage; they were entitled to 
redress under L21A, and by delaying the TD call, they caused L21C to apply 
instead.

But this is a specific MI situation.  Usually, when MI causes damage, L21C 
already applies at the point of the MI, and delaying the TD call will not 
affect the penalty.  (It may affect the credibility of the NOS; if a member 
of the NOS says, "I would have doubled the contract had I been correctly 
informed," the TD is less likely to believe him if the call comes late, 
after a close contract goes down one trick.)