[blml] nashville 12

[Adam Wildavsky]

On Aug 1, 2007 4:05 PM,  <richard.hills at immi.gov.au> wrote:
> WBF Laws Committee, 9th November 2003, item 3:
>
> "The committee considered the proposition that when
> there has been misinformation and a damaged side is
> to receive and adjusted score this should be
> assessed on the basis that the non-offending side
> is entitled to know the partnership understanding
> and to draw logical conclusions, given the
> information it received. The adjusted score, the
> Chairman suggested, should be assessed on the
> action likely to be taken by the non-offending side
> in the circumstances. It was observed that if given
> the correct information the partnership might or
> might not be aware that a misunderstanding had
> occurred, depending on the situation. There is, of
> course, the possibility of backing up the auction
> if declarer or dummy corrects an explanation as Law
> 75D requires (see also Law 21B)."

Thanks for tracking this down, Richard! I don't understand all of it,
but to the extent that I do it seems to support the ruling in the case
at hand. What do you think?

-- 
Adam Wildavsky  <adam at tameware.com>  www.tameware.com