[blml] Nondisclosure

[Wayne Burrows]

On 30/05/07, richard willey <richard.willey at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Wayne:
>
> I think that Robert has already introduced the most important point:
> This is a matter of interpreting local regulations rather than a
> question of law.
>
> I tried to skim the local regulations in New Zealand, but didn't make
> much headway.  Most of the examples seemed to deal with opening bids
> rather than overcalls.  I did, however, find this little gem under the
> section entitled "Alerting"
>
> If you are playing a complex system (permitted only in "A" point Pairs
> or Teams events) then a system card highlighting and advising the
> opponents that the system is unusual is (and always has been)
> compulsory and a verbal emphasis of this fact at the start of the
> round or match is also required.
>
> Most of the the examples of non-complex systems appear to "Green"
> systems like Acol or Standard American.  I believe that the normal
> conditions of contest would require an explict pre-alert of these
> methods.  In addition, while I am not familiar with the NZCBA
> convention card, I understand that a WBF card is considered to be an
> acceptable substitute.  This type of overcall absolutely needs to be
> disclosed on a WBF type card.
>
> Here's my take on the "appropriate" way to handle this situation.  I
> can't swear that this is necessarily legal, but it smells right
>
> 1.  Cancel this board and award an adjusted score
> 2.  Require the offending side to switch over to a simple system for
> the remainder of the session
> 3.  At such a time that the offending side is able to appropriately
> document their agreements, they will be permitted to start playing
> their original methods
>

I think this is a matter of law.  The regulations may allow or not a
particular method but that is not the issue that I have here.  The
problem is that players are supposed to disclose their methods (L40B).
 This prior disclosure especially in a trial or important long match
allows their opponent's to prepare an appropriate defense.  Turning up
at the table and finding out the opponents play a convention not
previously disclosed is IMO a violation of L40B.  So the problem is
how do deal with the problem.

On the actual hand what happened was probably not ideal.  The first
board was actually completed without any problem and the director was
called at the end of the hand to establish whether this method would
be allowed (not based on system regulations but on lack of prior
disclosure - there was some regulation saying that a pair may not
change their system from simplex to complex but it was not clear if
this applied) and much more importantly from my perspective to allow
my partner and I an opportunity to discuss a counter measure to this
unusual defensive system.

The opponents were allowed to play the method and we were denied any
time to prepare a defense.

Wayne Burrows

> On 5/29/07, Wayne Burrows <wjburrows at gmail.com> wrote:
> > 20 Board Match - National Trial
> > System Cards have been sent in weeks in advance.  There was an
> > opportunity to register changes at a meeting immediately before play
> > began in the first match.  This is match three on the evening of the
> > first day.
> >
> > Board One
> >
> > 1C (1S*) ?
> >
> > * Either diamonds or both majors
> >
> > This method over a natural 1C has not been disclosed on their card nor
> > any verbal mention made of this defense.
> >
> > Do you ...
> >
> > 1.  Allow this method
> >
> > 2.  Disallow this method?
> >
> > Assume you allow the method ...
> >
> > Do you ...
> >
> > 1.  Allow the opponents time to prepare a counter-defense
> >
> > 2.  Allow no time for the opponents to prepare
> >
> > 3.  Allow the opponents to prepare a defense but any time taken is
> > considered playing time
> >
> > 4.  As for 3 but charge any initial overrun in time solely to the side
> > that did not disclose
> >
> > 5. Something else that I have not thought of.
> >
> > Are there any circumstances in which you think it would be reasonable
> > to allow the method and not let their opponents have any time to
> > prepare a defense against this method (or a different method if that
> > is part of your circumstances).
> >
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Wayne
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > blml mailing list
> > blml at amsterdamned.org
> > http://www.amsterdamned.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
> >
>
>
> --
> The best lack all conviction, while the worst / Are full of passionate intensity
>