[blml] ACBL LC Detroit minutes

[Guthrie]

[Eric Landau]
I do hope this is a troll.  "Whatever the law says"?!  There can't
really be anyone reading this who actually thinks that "Stayman"
satisfies one's legal obligation to disclose one's methods, can
there?  The law requires you to disclose what your methods *are*; not
whom they were named after.

And what's more, if you tell them that 2C "asks for a four-card
major" and they ask you "what's a major?", the law requires you to
explain that to them too.

If you tell them that the majors are "hearts and spades" and they ask
"what's a spade?", *now* you're in moral as opposed to legal
obligation territory.


[Nige1]
It's not I who am trolling.

If opponents are brow-beating you or you experience insurmountable 
communication difficulties, surely the remedy is to call the director.

I still find it hard to understand the need for a "General knowledge" 
exclusion, especially when you suspect that opponents do not share that 
"General Knowledge". For example, an opponent gave an incomplete 
explanation when questioned about a call. The director supported 
opponents' contention that the omission was "general knowledge" 
(although my team of experienced players did not recognise it as such).

Incidentally, the Stayman example isn't mine, but, according to UK 
regulations, if the bidding starts 1N (P) 2C, you do announce "Stayman" 
if 2C is Stayman.