[blml] Is investigation needed after this incident?

[Eric Landau]

On Apr 2, 2008, at 7:12 AM, Robin Barker wrote:

> From: Alain Gottcheiner
>>>
>>> Easy, 1C(art)-1H(nat)-1S(ask)-2D(2 of HAKQ) and opener has 2 of HAKQ
>>
>> Interesting. Notice that it doesn't mean *partner* has forgotten his
>> system, but I imagine a bid meaning "your last bid is impossible IMHO
>> because there are only 4 aces / 3 tops / 12 controls, please  
>> reconsider"
>> would be legal.
>
> The only real difference for this system is who will place the  
> final contract.
>
> What about the legality of?
>
> 3C	I think we disagree or are about to disagree about the system.
> 	I think I have gone wrong: please place the final contract.
>
> 3D 	I think we disagree or are about to disagree about the system.
> 	I think you have gone wrong: please let me place the final contract.

What has agreeing or disagreeing about system to do with it?

3C: Asks partner to place the contract; 3C bidder will pass whatever  
pard bids next.

3D: Relay to 3H; makes 3D bidder's next bid strictly to play.

Those agreements might even be useful when there is no reason to  
think anyone has forgotten anything.  Why would anyone even think  
they might be illegal?


Eric Landau
1107 Dale Drive
Silver Spring MD 20910
ehaa at starpower.net