[blml] ACBL LC Detroit minutes

[Herman De Wael]

Alain Gottcheiner wrote:
> Herman De Wael a écrit :
>> Let's not toy with the words agreement and system.
>> Are the opponents entitled to know it?
>> The it forms part of the "partnership agreements" (is that the word in 
>> the 2007 laws?)
>> I was using the word "system" as a shorthand synonym.
>>
>>   
> But that's where I beg to differ.
> 
> When two players sit facing eachother for the first time, they have a 
> common system even if they didn't discuss anything. But they haven't any 
> agreements. It makes two to tango, er, agree.
> 

But then what is an agreement? Suppose we play together, and we 
discuss lots of things, but not 5-card majors, because we both assume 
that to start with. You open 1He on the first board, and they ask me 
"4 or 5-cards?". What am I to say? "we did not agree this". What when 
they ask: "impossible, you must have some idea". Should I not divulge 
that we are most certainly playing five-cards?

I think that even if we did not say it out loud, we "agreed" on 5-card 
majors. And anyway, it's not the word agreeing that is important, it's 
the bridge laws term: "partnership agreement".

-- 
Herman DE WAEL
Antwerpen Belgium
http://users.skynet.be/hermandw/index.html