[blml] L79B Is "subsequent" needed?

[Robert Geller]

Peter Eidt writes:

>Although I'm not a member of the DSC ...
>
>Subsequent here means "After an agreement upon the
>number of tricks won and after all four hands have been
>returned to the board".
>It does not mean "If no agreement can be reached
>upon the number of tricks won".
>
>The problem "If there is no agreement upon the number
>of tricks won" is a matter of Law 79A solely in combination
>with Law 65D.
>
>Therefore I think "subsequent" is needed in Law 79B.

->
Actually I initially thought the same as you say above 
= that "subsequent" in 79B meant
 "After an agreement upon the
>number of tricks won and after all four hands have been
>returned to the board" = 
but one of my colleagues from the JCBL convinced me this is not the case.

Let's suppose for the sake of argument that you are correct in what you say 
above.   If so, then it seems that L79 is incomplete as it now stands.
The major headings in L79 are now

LAW 79 - TRICKS WON
A. Agreement on Tricks Won
B. Disagreement on Tricks Won
C. Error in Score

but it seems very strange to me that L79B would contains a detailed
discussion of what to do iin the case of a disagreement AFTER agreement
had once been reach, but that there would be no mention anywhere in L79
of what to do in the presumably much more common case where there is
no agreement reached in the first place.    

Anyway, I'm confused......   










-----------------------------------------------------
Robert (Bob) Geller,     Tokyo, Japan        geller at nifty.com