[blml] alertability

[Eric Landau]

At 12:16 AM 1/12/07, richard.hills wrote:

>I would argue "Incapable lawbook!" rather than "Incapable
>director!"
>
>The director has simply made a ruling in accordance with
>the Marvin French interpretation of Law 75.  Law 75A
>requires all "special" partnership agreements to be
>disclosed, but Marvin French would argue that a Goren's
>Bridge Complete jump to 3H is not "special", so need not
>be disclosed.
>
>And the fact that Goren defines all jump raises as game
>forcing Marvin French defines as "general knowledge and
>experience" under Law 75C, so again Marvin French would
>argue that this information need not be disclosed.
>
>The possibility that Ed might never read Goren's Bridge
>Complete is irrelevant to a Marvin French interpretation
>of Law 75.  So, until Law 75 is rewritten, Ed cannot
>legally gain any satisfaction against a Director whose
>rulings are French fried.

The fallacy in the view that Richard ascribes to Marv is that nowhere 
does TFLB say that "general knowledge and experience" need not be 
disclosed.  L75C says that "*inferences from*... general knowledge and 
experience" [emphasis mine] need not be disclosed, which is something 
entirely different.

My interpretation of L75C says that you must inform your opponents that 
3H is game-forcing, notwithstanding that this may be GK&E, but need not 
respond, for example, to the follow-up question "what's the point range 
for that?", which you could readily figure out (and may well have 
already) from your GK&E.  (Of course, if you do have an explicit 
agreement about point range, you've already blown it by describing 3H 
only as "game-forcing".)


Eric Landau                     ehaa at starpower.net
1107 Dale Drive                 (301) 608-0347
Silver Spring MD 20910-1607