[blml] DeWael School and WBFLC [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

[bridgelaws at j-s-nichols.com]

WOW !

I have been away from BLML for a couple of years.

I decided to check it out again and there it is, the topic is STILL ALIVE.  

What is the record for the longest lived topic?

WOW !



>Herman De Wael さんは書きました:
>>Robert Geller wrote:
>>> The answer seems very simple.  He should give the correct answer
>>> according to the system, but this answer is UI to his partner.   If his 
>partner
>>> uses the info then there can/should be a score adjustment.  What's
>>> the problem?
>>> 
>>
>>The problem is that the answer seems equally simple to me, but my 
>>answer is exatly the opposite of yours. I believe the player should 
>>refrain from giving UI to partner, by explaining partner's bid in the 
>>way partner has intended it (which, incidentally, is a much more 
>>interesting reply for opponents than your solution, because your 
>>answer will not tell them anything worth while about his hand).
>
>->
>The general principle governing this matter is that the opponents are
>entitled to know your agreements, not what's actually in your hands.
>
>Herman, it seems to me you are arguing about what the laws and
>regulations should be, rather than what they actually are now.
>You may or may not be right if you are arguing about what the laws
>should be (although I personally don't agree), but I think you are
>incorrect in arguing that the present laws can be interpreted in
>the sense you advocate.
>
>-Bob
>
>
>>
>>> -Bob
>>> 
>>> Herman De Wael さんは書きました:
>>>> ton wrote:
>>>>>  
>>>>> Is it possible to repeat this interesting question? I must have missed 
>it
>>>>> and might have an opinion.
>>>>>
>>>>> ton
>>>>>
>>>> The question is the standard one from the discussion termed 
>>>> "DeWaelSchool" on this list for the past 10 years:
>>>>
>>>> A player hears his partner misexplain his previous bid and is now 
>>>> asked to explain partner's next one; he has two options:
>>>> - either he gives a correct systemic answer, thereby revealing that 
>>>> partner has misunderstood and creating UI for partner;
>>>> - or he tells the opponents what his partner intended, thereby not 
>>>> revealing that partner misunderstood, but giving additional MI.
>>>>
>>>> Which of the two should he do?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>> Herman DE WAEL
>>>> Antwerpen Belgium
>>>> http://www.hdw.be
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> blml mailing list
>>>> blml at amsterdamned.org
>>>> http://www.amsterdamned.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
>>> 
>>> -----------------------------------------------------
>>> Robert (Bob) Geller,     Tokyo, Japan        geller at nifty.com
>>> 
>>> 
>>
>>
>>-- 
>>Herman DE WAEL
>>Antwerpen Belgium
>>http://www.hdw.be
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>blml mailing list
>>blml at amsterdamned.org
>>http://www.amsterdamned.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
>
>-----------------------------------------------------
>Robert (Bob) Geller,     Tokyo, Japan        geller at nifty.com
>
>_______________________________________________
>blml mailing list
>blml at amsterdamned.org
>http://www.amsterdamned.org/mailman/listinfo/blml