[blml] Clarification... [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

[Wayne Burrows]

On 20/07/07, richard.hills at immi.gov.au <richard.hills at immi.gov.au> wrote:
> Eric Landau:
>
> >The WBFLC need to define observable criteria that indicate a
> >tendency has become an implicit understanding.  "Psychic" is a
> >red herring that can only distract from the real issue.
>
> Richard Hills:
>
> President Bill Clinton once said, "Abortion should be safe,
> legal and rare."  My interpretation of the criteria laid down
> in the WBF Code of Practice is that, "Psyches should be unsafe,
> legal and rare."  A particular rare psyche should not be made
> safe for partner by a player _always_ perpetrating that rare
> psyche.
>
> That is, in my opinion, a player's general permission to
> deviate from his side's announced understandings is limited to
> those cases when their partner has no more reason to be aware
> of the deviation than have their opponents.
>

On what do you base that opinion.  There are legal reasons while I
might be more aware that my partner psyches than my opponents are.

> In my opinion there is no general permission to _repeatedly_
> deviate from announced partnership understandings, since such
> repetition leads to implicit partnership understandings which
> then form part of the partnership's methods and must be
> disclosed (if legal) or refrained from (if illegal - such as,
> for example, a banned HUM method of automatically opening 1H
> with 0-4 hcp in third seat).
>

The general position is in Law 40A "A player may make any call ...".
Yes there is a caveat but that caveat is not that repetition makes the
psyche illegal.


Repetition or as the law says 'habitual violations' only 'may' lead to
implicit agreements.  There is no necessity.  I have at least one
partnership in which I cannot imagine there ever being an agreement -
implicit or otherwise - that we psyche.  Nevertheless I still uphold
my right to psyche in that partnership.

Therefore your conclusion is only partially valid.  Only when an
agreement has been reached are the requirements of disclosure and
system regulations as you state.  Even without agreement there is a
requirement to disclose partnership experience.

Wayne