[blml] Alerting Rules [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

[richard.hills at immi.gov.au]

Richard Hills asserted:

>>the explanation should have been, "transfer, promising at
>>least  five hearts, but if partner holds six or more
>>hearts then partner is guaranteeing some values, since we
>>play an immediate 3H response as  pre-emptive."

In a private email, another blmler quibbled:

>You are right, of course, that full explanation must
>always be given, but the practicalities of tournament play
>make that difficult. I can imagine a director walking past
>and saying, "Are you still giving an explanation of that
>multi? I have already told you that you are two boards
>behind; now get a move on!" But you are right that
>"transfer" in the case in question does adopt a minimalist
>approach.

Richard Hills re-asserts:

If I was the Director, I would not accept an excuse that:

"I had to give incomplete and therefore misleading
information about our agreements because we have chosen
such complex methods that timely full disclosure would be
impossible."

Rather, after adjusting the score and applying a procedural
penalty, I would then order that pair to play a simpler
system for the rest of the session (ABF Alert Regulation,
clause 10.1).


Best wishes

Richard James Hills, amicus curiae
Level 6 Aqua Training Suite, DIAC
02 6225 6776

Important Notice: If you have received this email by mistake, please advise
the sender and delete the message and attachments immediately.  This email,
including attachments, may contain confidential, sensitive, legally
privileged and/or copyright information.  Any review, retransmission,
dissemination or other use of this information by persons or entities other
than the intended recipient is prohibited. DIAC respects your privacy and
has obligations under the Privacy Act 1988. The official departmental
privacy policy can be viewed on the department's website at www.immi.gov.au
See: http://www.immi.gov.au/functional/privacy.htm