[blml] L9A vs L73B1 [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

[richard.hills at immi.gov.au]

Nigel Guthrie:

>We have asked UK national tournament directors whether it is OK to
>ask when your action is contingent on the answer. Apparently, it
>is OK and the director will overlook the unauthorised information
>that may be generated if you subsequently take no action when you
>learn the actual meaning. In this case, arguably you are asking for
>your *own* benefit. It is coincidental that partner will benefit
>too.

Richard Hills:

(1) In this thread's original case under discussion, you already
know what the opponents' methods are, so asking is exclusively - not
merely coincidentally - for partner's benefit (so that partner will
not misinterpret your forthcoming overcall).

(2) The paraphrase "overlook the unauthorised information" is either
a misquotation or a misstatement.  For example, your action may be
"contingent on the answer" to the question, "Was 2C Stayman?", but
then "you subsequently take no action when you learn the actual
meaning".

EBU White Book clause 16.9 (WBF LC minute 30th Oct 2001 paraphrase):

"A question about the meaning of a call (even of an alerted call)
may provide unauthorised information to partner.  For example,
suppose a Stayman 2C response to 1NT is alerted in accordance with
the regulations for the tournament and a player then asks its
meaning.  A partner of the enquirer who subsequently leads a club
against an ensuing 3NT may well be called upon to demonstrate that
he has a hand from which very few players would choose an opening
lead in a different suit.  The point is that it is not safe to
assume that a question provides no unauthorised information just
because it is about an alerted call."


Best wishes

Richard James Hills, amicus curiae
National Training Branch, DIAC
02 6225 6285

Important Notice: If you have received this email by mistake, please advise
the sender and delete the message and attachments immediately.  This email,
including attachments, may contain confidential, sensitive, legally
privileged and/or copyright information.  Any review, retransmission,
dissemination or other use of this information by persons or entities other
than the intended recipient is prohibited. DIAC respects your privacy and
has obligations under the Privacy Act 1988. The official departmental
privacy policy can be viewed on the department's website at www.immi.gov.au
See: http://www.immi.gov.au/functional/privacy.htm