[blml] new L27

[Wayne Burrows]

On 07/03/2008, Steve Wright <blml at wrightnet.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <200803051306.AA12739 at geller204.nifty.com>, Robert Geller
> <geller at nifty.com> writes
> >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?  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
> >
> >
> >
>
> My gut feeling for how this would work is to do the following:
>
> Taking the example 1H (P) 1H
>
> 1] Take the player away from the table and determine the intent. The
> player tells me that "I though partner had passed". So I now know that
> was intended to be a 1H opening bid.
>
> 2] Ask the player if they have any bids that show a 4-card heart suit
> and an opening bid when partner opens 1H. They reply that a 2NT response
> and a splinter bid. (I could have asked what would you have bid had you
> seen your partner's 1H bid).
>
> 3] Determine that, in my opinion, both 2NT and a splinter are a more
> precise meaning and thus acceptable.
>
> 4] Tell the player that when we return to the table, I will give you the
> option of bidding 2H or the alternative of either a 2NT or a splinter,
> but I won't tell the players what those alternatives are.
>
> 5] Return to the table as say to the other players, "I know what the
> insufficient bid meant - you don't". To the offender I would say, "On
> the assumption that LHO does not accept your bid, you have the following
> options: You may bid 2H or one of the alternative bids that we
> discussed. If you do, then the action will continue without any further
> penalty. Or, you may pass or bid something else, in which case partner
> will be forced to pass throughout."
>
> 6] "LHO, do you wish to accept or have it corrected to something legal?"
> - "Correct it please"
>
> 7] "Your 1H is now cancelled". I pick the 1H and return it to the
> bidding box. "Please bid, however I should warn you that if you don't
> bid hearts and become a defender then there will be lead penalties."
>
> In some circumstances I would mention at point [5] that they can't
> double for penalties. Not in this example as we would be doubling
> partner's bid. I would in those circumstances remove the double cards
> from the bidding box and the return them after the bid has been
> corrected. This emphasises that they can't double on this round, but can
> double later. In the past I've had players hear "you can't double on
> this round" and being overwhelmed with the whole situation have assumed
> that it meant "you can't double for the rest of the auction" :-)
>
> If I thought there was a possibility of adjustment under "New New L27D",
> then I would say at point [7], "If you reach a contract that is
> impossible if you had bid properly, and gain from it, then I will adjust
> the score"
>

The way most pairs seem to play splinters I doubt that they would meet
the requirement of showing an opening hand.

Wayne