[blml] new laws in book form

[Wayne Burrows]

On 04/02/2008, gesta at tiscali.co.uk <gesta at tiscali.co.uk> 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: "Wayne Burrows" <wjburrows at gmail.com>
> To: "Bridge Laws Mailing List" <blml at amsterdamned.org>
> Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2008 11:15 PM
> Subject: Re: [blml] new laws in book form
>
>
> >
> > I am curious ... what exactly is the problem with L27C.  It seems to
> > be sensible the way that it is written.
> >
> > If the insufficient bid gave more information then a replacement it is
> > not allowed without penalty if it gave less information then a
> > replacement is allowed with no penalty.
> >
> > Wayne
> >
> +=+ The more narrowly a bid is defined the more information
> it conveys. The information available from a call comprises
> both what it shows and what it excludes. Thus a call which
> shows a balanced 15-17 conveys more information than a
> call that shows a balanced 15-20. Our discussion centres
> on whether this is understood or what we need to do to the
> law to help TDs in Puddington and  Tsagannuur to grasp
> the point.

A footnote or some common sense should do the trick.

Wayne