[blml] By the pricking of my thumbs [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

[Grattan Endicott]

from Grattan Endicott
grandeval at vejez.fsnet.co.uk
[also gesta at tiscali.co.uk]
****************************
"The best words in the best order"
                          ~ S T Coleridge.
''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Sven Pran" <svenpran at online.no>
To: "blml" <blml at rtflb.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2007 5:52 PM
Subject: Re: [blml] By the pricking of my thumbs [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]


> > On Behalf Of Tim West-Meads
> > Richard postulated
> > 
> > > Except that it seems to me that a Law 25A
> > > inadvertent call is not an irregularity.
> > 
> > L18d: A bid that fails to supersede the 
> > immediately previous bid is an insufficient bid.
> > 
> > No exceptions there for inadvertency.
> > 
> > Tim
> 
> A call that has been accepted under Law 25A 
> as an inadvertent call is considered null and void. 
> Consequently it has never been made, conveyed 
> no information and was no more an irregularity 
> than for instance a casual cough or sneeze would 
> be.
> 
> Sven
> 
+=+ Are you saying that, for the purposes of Law 16,
no unauthorized information can result from what has 
occurred?  If so, when partner draws an inference and 
bases ensuing action upon it?
                       ~ Grattan ~   +=+