[blml] 40B3

[Alain Gottcheiner]

Guthrie a écrit :
>
> Players who can change their bidding systems after they have made an 
> illegal bid, or eg change their carding agreements when they have a 
> penalty card exposed, can turn out to actually profit from their 
> irregularities. I feel very strongly that that should not be the case; 
> they should be in a position to lose out or break even.
>
>   
Extracting some profit from one's irregularity is allowed as long as you 
didn't do it on purpose (e. g. your penalty card happens to be the right 
lead) ; having agreements would be an "on purpose" case and could, to 
the extreme, lead to cases where you'll be glad to expose some card in 
order to have the right carding agreement for the situation. For this 
reason, among others, agreements should be disallowed.

There is, however, a real problem : any experienced partner will know 
that your 4S bid after you somehow barred him can be less than pure ; if 
it happened more than once, this departure from system will be 
considered an agreement according to L75B. I can't see any way out of this.

> And yes, I do think that there are players who will deliberately commit 
> an infraction if there is no deterrent.
>
> [nige1]
> Unless explicitly forbidden by local legislation, 40B3 seems to permit 
> you to agree different sets of conventions, that depend on any of the 
> following
>   - The question that you or opponents ask.
>   - The answer that you or opponents give.
>   
Well, in the latter subcase "according to the response they give", it 
must be allowed, because this is equivalent (if they didn't give MI) to 
"according to their system", which, of course, is allowed.

> I go further than Stefanie. I wish that the law did not encourage 
> different sets of agreements that depend on which option you choose 
> after an infraction by an opponent. 
Same problem. It's obvious that if you allow them to bid 1H over 1S, 
then raise to 1S, your 1S bid is fairly weak. Once again L75B tells us 
this will become an agreement even if you didn't discuss it. "According 
to their question" would lead to the same problem if, like me, you're 
more prone to double when they showed anxiety about your announced strength.
Well, perhaps L75B is the culprit ?


Best regards

    Alain