[blml] ACBL LC Detroit minutes

[Steve Willner]

> From: Alain Gottcheiner <agot at ulb.ac.be>
> 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.

L75C (1997 version) requires disclosure of "information conveyed to him 
through partnership agreement."  This is rather more than just the 
agreements themselves.

> Something that hasn't ever be discussed can't be agreed upon /a 
> fortiori. 

Oh, come on, Alain.  There are implicit agreements.  Suppose you and I 
sit down together 10 seconds before game time and say "5cM, weak NT, 
OK?"  And on the first board, our unopposed auction goes 1C-1H-1NT.  Do 
you really think "undiscussed" is enough?  We both know this 1NT won't 
be 12-14 balanced!  In the ACBL, it would require an alert.

In the original example case, both players realized that as a result of 
other agreements, the 3D bid had to show a specific hand type, despite 
having no prior discussion of the exact sequence.  Do you really think 
the opponents are not entitled to know the same thing?

And as Herman said, when two partners bid as though they are in 
agreement, in practice a TD is virtually certain to rule that an 
agreement exists.  (Herman often writes a bit carelessly, but I don't 
think I've ever seen him fundamentally and demonstrably wrong.)