[blml] Disclosure

[Steve Willner]

From: "Grattan Endicott" <grandeval at vejez.fsnet.co.uk>
> Concerning (b) I do not think one should disclose one's 
> own belief that 'we are having a bad game'. 

I agree with that.

> I am inclined to think that how well you are doing is more a matter 
> of judgement than of information in a pairs movement. Even in head to 
> head teams and some other events that judgement is equally available 
> to both pairs at the table

If you have played head to head, then the opponents have the same 
information about your game you do.  Their judgment may be better or 
worse than yours, but that's fine.  The problem comes in a pairs 
movement, when they lack access to the relevant information.

From: Herman De Wael <hermandw at skynet.be>
> - "That is 10-12 if we're non-vulnerable, 15-17 if we are vulnerable".
> Surely the info if they are vul is crucial, but it is known.

Giving only the answer relevant to the current conditions would suffice, 
though it won't hurt to add "at this vulnerability" to avoid future 
problems.  (In the extreme of playing many different ranges depending on 
seat and vul., a complete answer for all conditions is not even desirable.)

> - "That is certainly natural if we are having a good game, but very 
> frequently a psyche if we are not".

My suggestion is that good/bad game is not disclosable _per se_, but its 
_implication_ for your partnership experience is disclosable.  Thus I'd 
suggest "almost certainly natural" or "frequently a psyche" would be 
proper, depending on your judgment of your game.  ("Almost" because your 
judgment may possibly be wrong, but you could leave out the qualifier if 
you are sure.)