[blml] By the pricking of my thumbs

[Harald Skjæran]

On 05/03/07, Roger Pewick <axman22 at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Sven Pran" <svenpran at online.no>
> To: "blml" <blml at rtflb.org>
> Sent: Sunday, March 04, 2007 2:44 PM
> Subject: Re: [blml] By the pricking of my thumbs
>
>
> >> On Behalf Of Roger Pewick
> >> >...............
> >> > > Read the law ...
> >> >
> >> >Indeed.
> >> >Law 25A:
> >> >Until his partner makes a call, a player may substitute his intended
> >> >call
> >> >for an inadvertent call but only if he does so, or attempts to do so,
> >> >without pause for thought.
> > ..................
> >> Conversely L25A provides that in order for there to be an expectation of
> >> no
> >> penalty when a player corrects his call- the player must indeed
> >> substitute
> >> it.  If the player's election to substitute depends upon finding out
> >> whether
> >> or not his substitution will be penalized, or his rights,  it is de facto
> >> after pause for thought.
> >>
> >> As such, it is right to presume that if a player hasn't stated his
> >> intention
> >> to correct his call prior placing his bidding card on the table and then
> >> immediately follow through then to do so later there has been pause and
> >> such
> >> pause has been filled with thought.
> >
> > Do yourself the favour and explain how your view can be compatible with
> > the
> > leading clause in Law 25A: "Until his partner makes a call".
> >
> > Note that even after LHO has made a subsequent call the time window for
> > applying L25A is still open!
> >
> > Sven
>
> Case 1 [the almost always case] the player makes an inadvertent call where
> he is not impeded from correcting it.
>
> The law specifies that the correction must be made without pause for thought
> from the point in time the call is made.

How can you say so, Roger??
"from the point in time the call is made" is neither mentioned in the
law nor implied.

Law 25A:
"Until his partner makes a call, a player may substitute his intended
call for an inadvertent call but only if he does so, or attempts to do
so, without pause for thought."

If your "interpretation" was correct, the firstpart of the sentence
("until his partner makes a call") would have absolutely no meaning.
It would have to read "until his LHO makes a call" or something
similar.

Obviously, the meaning is that he may substitute his intended call for
the inadvertent call without pause for thought from the moment he
becomes aware of the misbid. How he may become aware of the
inadvertent call might be open for interpretation/discussion.

I'd allow a change without penalty in the actual case - as presented
here. Though I understand from Grattan's postings that his view is
different, I'm not certain of the WBFLC's intentions.


-- 
Kind regards,
Harald Skjæran

>
> Case 2 [a very rare occurrence]
>
> At the time the call is being made a distraction outside the partnership's
> control prevents detection that a misspull has occurred.  An example,
> 'FIRE!'  where the LHO has called, perhaps quite quickly.  Or also, the
> opponent starts his call before the player has finished his action [or so
> quickly that the player had no opportunity to correct before the opponent
> called].  The opponent's premature reaching for his bidding cards being a
> distraction preventing the noticing of a misspull.
>
> The opportunity to correct an inadvertent call [misspull] without pause for
> thought ends once partner has called- it being a rare occasion that the
> opportunity is still available at the time the LHO begins reaching for his
> bidding cards [due to the condition not being satisfied- without pause for
> thought].
>
> regards
> roger pewick
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> blml mailing list
> blml at amsterdamned.org
> http://www.amsterdamned.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
>