[blml] ACBL LC Detroit minutes

[Herman De Wael]

Alain Gottcheiner wrote:
> Steve Willner a écrit :
>>> 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?  
> 
> Nope; I would call this discussed and agreed upon, at least as concerns 
> lower range.
> But in your example, the strength of a 2NT opening bid is undiscussed, 
> although bridge logic tells us of an approximative range, so I would 
> answer "undiscussed" and treat it as ca. a 21-count, without any feeling 
> of guilt.
> 

But Alain, "undiscussed" as answer would not be enough, not against 
some opponents. If this happens in your club, where the opponents know 
both you and your partner, and their "normal" range for 2NT, 
"undiscussed" is enough, because it is synonimous to "some range 
around the 21 mark".

But if you are playing together in Australia, the least you can do is 
tell them you are not playing strong clubs, and even then they will 
probably not know enough, so you might as well say "some range around 
the 21 mark".

The point being that even without any discussion, you do have an 
agreement to play 2NT "some range around the 21 mark".

> Best regards
> 


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