[blml] Obviously this is the prime duty

[Matthias Berghaus]

David Barton schrieb:
> From: <Gampas at aol.com>
>
>
>
>   
>>> In a message dated 19/10/2007 12:55:47 GMT Standard Time, twm at cix.co.uk
>>> drivels:
>>>       
>>> 2. He is actually vulnerable (he looked at the board subsequently -  AI)
>>>       
>> The reason he looked at the board subsequently was because of his 
>> partner's
>> explanation; he wanted to find out who was due to a visit to Specsavers 
>> and he
>> discovered it was him, but from the UI of his partner's explanation.
>>
>> Paul
>>     
>
> If we take a different scenario - A player wishes to open 1NT and is 
> surprised
> to see his partner alert (UI). He looks down and sees that that the bidding 
> card
> in front of him is 2C (AI). It is well established that he can now rectify 
> his
> mechanical error, despite the attention having been drawn to it by UI.
>   

The big difference is that in 25A cases he never intended to bid what he 
actually placed on the table, while in cases of e.g. mistaken 
vulnerability he _intended_ his original bid, and now learns that he 
should have had a second look. In the first case we have a mechanical 
error, in the second a mental one. Different kettle of fish altogether.