[blml] Law 27 - relay

[David Barton]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Stefanie Rohan" <daisy_duck at btopenworld.com>
To: "Bridge Laws Mailing List" <blml at amsterdamned.org>
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2008 12:37 AM
Subject: Re: [blml] Law 27 - relay


> L&E
>
>> However, today this was reviewed and altered to read:
>>  "(d) A pair is allowed to vary, by prior agreement, its
>>   understandings during the auction and play consequent
>>   on an irregularity by either side, except that following its
>>   own insufficient bid a partnership may not change by
>>   prior agreement the meaning of a replacement call so
>>   that it is brought within the criteria of Law27B1(b)."
>
> This is an improvement, but I am wondering if Grattan or DALB could 
> explain
> why agreeing to vary "understandings" after an infraction by our side 
> would
> be desirable.
>
> Stefanie Rohan
> London, England
>

When, due to an infraction by our side, a member of our partnership is 
obliged
to pass throughout, then our understandings are varied as follows

(a) ALL bids are natural and non forcing
(b) ALL doubles are for penalty
(c) we no longer play any forcing passes.

Does anyone think that such agreement is illegal or undesirable?

*****************************************
  david.j.barton at lineone.net
*****************************************
-------------- next part --------------

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG. 
Version: 8.0.93 / Virus Database: 269.23.4/1396 - Release Date: 4/24/2008 6:32 PM