[blml] new L27

[John (MadDog) Probst]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Robert Geller" <geller at nifty.com>
To: "Bridge Laws Mailing List" <blml at amsterdamned.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 1:06 PM
Subject: [blml] new L27


Could've been better, could've been worse.

The good news (IMO).
   1. Most of the time we'll be dealing with an IB replaced by the lowest
sufficient RB in the same denomination, and this will pose no problem for
directors. as it's what they're useful.
   2. A replacement call of RDBL is now also included in 27B1b

The bad news (IMO)
    1. The pernicious concept of "meaning of the IB" has been retained,
although in a somewhat less toxic form than the original L27C of the
2007 Laws.
    2. The mechanics of 27B1b will probably cause trouble for directors and
players, not to mention RA's.   27B1a is clear to all.   But after the 
director
explains 27B1b to an IBer at the table, the player will want to know
("can I call X without penalty"?).   How does the player actually do this?
Does he ask the director in front of his pard?

The TDs will explain what's allowed. It's part of the job. I'd not worry too 
much about that.  John


 Or is his pard sent away
from the table with the oppts allowed to listen in?  And how (except in the
most frequent cases, like a negative dbl of 1S after an IB of 1H) will the
director answer?   This will be fraught.....

Oh well, it could've been much worse.

-Bob