[blml] San Diego Lightfoot Sue [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

[Grattan Endicott]

Grattan Endicott
grandeval at vejez.fsnet .co.uk
[also gesta at tiscali.co.uk]
*************************
"Progress is not an accident but
 a necessity."
                      {Herbert Spencer}
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Hans van Staveren" <sater at xs4all.nl>
To: "'Bridge Laws Mailing List'" <blml at amsterdamned.org>
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2007 9:38 AM
Subject: Re: [blml] San Diego Lightfoot Sue
                                [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]


> This is exactly what the Dutch AC is now doing. If your
> opponents misbid, in general they get a bad score. However,
> sometimes they are lucky. It is human nature to see this as
> unjust, and try to compensate. However, the Laws state
> specifically that they are allowed to keep their good score
> when they get lucky.
>
> Hans
>
+=+  The position Hans adopts is based firmly on the law book
statement that "... the mistake was in South's bid. Here there is
no infraction of law, since East-West did receive an accurate
description of the North-South agreement; they have no claim
to an accurate description of the North-South hands". (The
book goes on to remind players that when they are aware that
their call has been misinterpreted that knowledge is UI and
they must not base their further actions upon it.)
        On the question of misbid/misexplanation there is no legal
basis for any other stance. However, I do have one disquiet,
namely that the SO may have licensed the use of convention X
on condition that it may not be misused or psyched. There would
then be an infraction of a regulation established under Law 40D,
independent of and without regard to misexplanation. Such a
condition is not excluded by the unrestricted language of Law
40D. The remedy would then be whatever remedy is prescribed
for illegal use of a convention.
                                                             ~ Grattan ~ 
+=+