[blml] the Kaplan Question (precis, part 1 of 2) [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: <richard.hills at immi.gov.au>
To: <blml at rtflb.org>
Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2007 6:59 AM
Subject: Re: [blml] the Kaplan Question 
(precis,part 1 of 2) [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]
.
> 
> Suppose 2C as Simple Stayman is written on the opponents' CC,
> and local regulations require Simple Stayman to be alerted.
> And suppose a 2C response to 1NT is not alerted.  If a double
> of Stayman shows clubs, but a double of a natural 2C shows the
> other three suits, could a question about the 2C call be an
> illegal attempt to communicate with partner (L73B1)?  I think
> the answer must be "yes".
> 
+=+ I would think the players here are in the hands of the TD
and his judgement of the balance of probabilities. Not every 
TD would reach the same conclusion - which might perhaps 
even hinge on the purply bloom on the players' cheeks. 
                                             ~ Grattan ~   +=+