[blml] 2007 laws

[Brian]

On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 18:00:31 -0400
Ed Reppert <ereppert at rochester.rr.com> wrote:

> 
> On Oct 16, 2007, at 4:50 PM, Brian wrote:
> 
> > For the benefit of any BLML subscriber who hasn't tried the online
> > services, then the system regulations on BBO are simple enough,
> > anything is allowed subject to full disclosure, and alert anything
> > you think might not be fully understood by your opponents. Might be
> > different in the tournaments, I don't play in them.
> 
> That alert regulation is a bit, well, loose. Suppose I don't think  
> something needs to be alerted, but somebody else thinks it does? 

You err on the side of over-alerting. Occasionally it will still
happen, of course. You have to remember that these alert regulations
need to be comprehensible by players from all over the world, many of
whom will have limited knowledge of English. The occasional "you should
have alerted that" seems a small price to pay for simplicity. In my
experience, most people who are playing something unusual are
conscientious about alerting. It's the SAYC and 2/1 players who seldom,
if ever, alert.

 
> Suppose I alert something and an opponent thinks I'm insulting his  
> intelligence or bridge knowledge?
> 

Then it's time to find a new opponent. Anyone who takes offence at
someone who is obviously trying to practice full disclosure is
obviously an idiot. The alert involves no extra work for the
opponent, and they can ignore the explanations if they want to. 

Just shove said oppo on your twit list, and forget about him/her. 


Brian. 

-- 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.amsterdamned.org/pipermail/blml/attachments/20071017/964e8572/attachment.pgp