[blml] Amended L27C1/27C2 question

[Robert Geller]

The more we think about L27C1/2 the more we can see what a can of worms
has been opened.   

Just to refresh your memory, here's what L27 says.
************************************************************
1. If the insufficient bid is replaced by a bid at the lowest legal
level or double or pass that incorporates the information contained in
the insufficient bid, the auction and play continues with the
information arising from the withdrawn bid authorized for both sides
(Law 16D does not apply), but see 2 following.
2. At the end of the play the Director shall award an adjusted score if
he judges that without assistance from the insufficient bid the contract
could well have been different*, and the non-offending side is damaged.
************************************************************

As innumerable discussions have pointed out "incorporates" can be
interpreted in different ways.  2 eamples:

EX1:
W	N	E	S
1H	1C*
*replaced by 2C when insufficent bid is pointed out.
Problem: 
1C is 3(2)+ and opening bid strength.  But 2C is a 5+ suit (almost
always) but need not be opening bid strength and almost certainly is less
than 20pts maximum (whereas in the case of the replaced IB it may be 20pts)

Question:
Should the floor director allow this substitution or not?  Under what criteria?


EX2:
W	N	E	S
1S	1H*
*replaced by 2H when insufficent bid is pointed out.
Problem: 
1C is 5+ and opening bid strength (about 10-20pts).    But a "real" 2H
overcall is less than (say) 16 pts and with a stronger hand North would
double.  However, under the above circumstances South knows that
2H may be up to 20 pts.     

Question:
Should the floor director allow this substitution or not?  Under what criteria?



EX3:
W	N	E	S
P	1C	1S	1H*
Scenario a:
*replaced by NEGx when insufficent bid is pointed out.

Scenario b: 
*replaced by 2H when insufficent bid is pointed out.

Problem: 
1H is 4+ and 6+ points.  But 2H (scenario b) is 5+ and 10+ points.
Whereas neg x (scenario a) is 4+ hearts with 6-9 points,
but 4 hearts (exactly) with 10+ points.  

Question:
Should the floor director allow either of these substitutions or not?  
Under what criteria?



++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I'm sure other people can come up with lots of better scenarios.
But just thinking about the above 3 scenarios I'm beginning to think that
the new laws have opened up a real can of worms.  I know it would
involve a certain amount of loss of face for all concerned, but is there
anyone besides me who thinks it might be better to go back to the old
laws with regard to insufficient bids, and spend the next 10 years 
further researching this question.

-Bob
 






.

	
   
	

 




Sven Pran writes:
>For a definite answer to your questions we hall better await the outcome of
>the discussions currently in progress within WBFLC.
>
>But the main intention with the new Law 27C was (as I have understood it) to
>allow a normal contract to be reached in spite of an insufficient bid during
>the auction provided the contract should be reached without any "assistance"
>from the insufficient bid.
>
>In your case the IB "probably" shows opening strength. Say that this is
>sufficient for partner to go for a game contract. 
>
>If South has available a legal call to replace his IB that eventually will
>allow the partnership to reach the same successful contract while
>disregarding all special information no longer available from the "opening
>bid" in 1C then reaching this contract should be permissible.
>
>One example that was initially presented is the auction:
>1C - 1S - 1H where the IB (1H) is replaced by a negative double. Both the IB
>and the replacement call essentially show four hearts and some values.
>
>Regards Sven
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: blml-bounces at amsterdamned.org [mailto:blml-bounces at amsterdamned.org]
>> On Behalf Of Robert Geller
>> Sent: 10. februar 2008 19:21
>> To: Bridge Laws Mailing List
>> Subject: [blml] Amended L27C1/27C2 question
>> 
>> Sorry, my bad.    I wasn't thinking or writing clearly.  What I should
>> have
>> said was,  if we change the circumstances of the actually example in
>> several ways it can (perhaps) serve as the basis for a hypothetical
>> question.   Please delete the previous example and let me start over
>> again.
>> 
>> 
>> IMPS, Dlr E, None Vul
>> 	South
>> 	S Kxxx
>> 	H KTxx
>> 	D x
>> 	CAQxx
>> Q1. Let's look only at the South cards for a moment,
>> Suppose East opens 1D and, not having seen it, South then makes
>> an insufficient bid of 1C, not accepted by West.   If he then changes this
>> to 2C, should the 2C call be regarded as "incorporating the information
>> contained in the insufficient bid" (1C)?
>> 
>> If the answer to Q1 is no presumably 27D1 then applies and we can stop
>> here.
>> But if the answer to Q1 is yes then presumably the auction is allowed
>> to continue for the moment.
>> 
>> Suppose the North hand is
>> 	North
>> 	S AQx
>> 	H 98x
>> 	D KTxx
>> 	C K9x.
>> Q2a. If West passes, North bids 2NT and South raises to 3NT, which happens
>> to make, should this result be rectified under 27C2?   Does the answer
>> depend on the quality of the EW defense?
>> 
>> Q2b. If West passes, North bids 2NT and South passes, and 2NT happens
>> to make, should this result be rectified under 27C2?   Does the answer
>> depend on the quality of the EW defense?
>> 
>> Q2c. If West passes, North bids 3NT and South passes, and 3NT happens
>> to make, should this result be rectified under 27C2?   Does the answer
>> depend on the quality of the EW defense?
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -----------------------------------------------------
>> Robert (Bob) Geller,     Tokyo, Japan        geller at nifty.com
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> blml mailing list
>> blml at amsterdamned.org
>> http://www.amsterdamned.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>blml mailing list
>blml at amsterdamned.org
>http://www.amsterdamned.org/mailman/listinfo/blml

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