[blml] ABF seminar - Law 27C

[Tony Musgrove]

At 04:43 PM 1/02/2008, you wrote:

>Grattan Endicott<gesta at tiscali.co.uk
>[following address discontinued:
>grandeval at vejez.fsnet.co.uk]
>*******************************
>"Continuing to do the same thing
>  hoping for a different outcome."
>            Einstein: definition of madness.
>  +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Eric Landau" <ehaa at starpower.net>
>To: "Bridge Laws Mailing List" <blml at amsterdamned.org>
>Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 9:44 PM
>Subject: Re: [blml] ABF seminar - Law 27C
>
>
> >> Maybe it is my dyslexia, but I find the way the law
> >> uses the word "incorporates" almost permanently
> >> confusing.  What Venn diagram symbolizes "incorporating
> >> information"?  I don't think an information theorist would
> >> be sure what is meant, so a rewording or a clarification is
> >> in order.
> >
>+=+ In my discussions of Law 27C currently I introduced
>Wayne's comment. Here is a response I received from the
>WBF CTD:
>"In drawing his Venn diagrmans, I assume Laurie Kelso began
>with a fairly small circle for the information 'I have 0-12 points',
>(or whatever the example was) as this doesn't really contain
>very much information at all. Then he drew a larger circle around
>it for the information 'I have 5-9 points', as this contains quite a
>lot of additional information.
>
>Then he drew a huge circle around both of these to represent
>the information 'I have 6 points', as this contains all the information
>in the universe as far as point count is concerned.
>
>The little old lady you describe below would not then have
>followed her confused line of logic, and would have seen
>that it is 5-9 which incorporates 0-12, and not the other
>way round."

Aha, I think I've got it (why I am confused I mean)

They bid    1C (1S) 1H (insufficient).

I find out that the 1H bidder did not see the intermediate 1S.
The previous correction to 2H would show 10+ points and
5+hearts, so I do not allow it (it gives more information than
the 1H would have).  However, I can offer the perpetrator
a negative double if it means (in their system) 'I would have
bid 1H).  On the other hand, if I find the 1H bidder did not
see the two previous bids, and was opening the bidding
(albeit OOT), I allow the 2H change without penalty.  What
could be easier

Cheers
Tony (Sydney)


>                            ~ Grattan ~   +=+
>
>_______________________________________________
>blml mailing list
>blml at amsterdamned.org
>http://www.amsterdamned.org/mailman/listinfo/blml