[blml] New L27

[Herman De Wael]

Steve Willner wrote:
>> From: "Sven Pran" <svenpran at online.no>
>> IMO the only really relevant part of that law is as related to
>> irregularities.
>>
>> You are not allowed to communicate with your partner by asking, not asking
>> or replying to questions. 
> 
> Indeed.
> 
>> Although your partner will obviously notice any
>> such activity he is prohibited from selecting any action among alternatives
>> based on his knowledge of it.
> 
> If the information is UI and suggests one action over another, partner 
> may be _required_ to take it into account (1997 L16A).
> 
>> "Such action" includes varying partnership
>> understandings.
> 
> Probably true.
> 

Not completely true, since L16 only talks about "calls and plays" not 
about "actions". Of course, in the sense that the next bid is varied 
according to this new partnership understanding, making that call is 
subject to L16, so, indeed, varying the partnership understanding is 
prohibited "on the rebound".

>> Consequently I see no way a partnership can legally vary their
>> understandings following questions asked or replied to regardless of what a
>> regulating authority may have decided.
> 
> What about _opponents'_ questions?  I gave the example of our artificial 
> 1D bid.  Suppose an opponent makes a direct 2D overcall.  Of course we 
> ask what it means and are told "No agreement; we've never discussed your 
> kind of 1D bid."  Why can't we vary our agreements according to whether 
> the 2D bidder did or did not ask the meaning of 1D.  (We know perfectly 
> well what the overcaller is showing, and it's different depending on 
> whether he asked about 1D or not.)
> 

In the sense that from his not asking, you determine what he intended, 
you are allowed to vary your system on his meaning.
Depending the meaning of your next bid on his asking or not can be a 
problem - because he might well know without asking. Then, to depend 
on your asking is like changing your system according to something 
else than the condition on the board, which is expressly forbidden.



-- 
Herman DE WAEL
Antwerpen Belgium
http://users.skynet.be/hermandw/index.html