[blml] 40B3

[Stefanie Rohan]

> [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.
>  - The option that you or opponent choose after an infraction by you or
> opponents.

Amazingly, this is what is says.
>
> It is unpleasant that a normal reading of the law opens a Pandora's box
> of exploits ...
>
> Opponent opens 1C (RHO alerts). Partner doubles (you alert). RHO asks
> what the double means. You explain that partner ...
>  - Passes without asking lacking anything to say.
>  - Passes after asking with a takeout double.
>  - Doubles without asking with 5+ clubs.
>  - Doubles after asking with weak notrump.
>  - Overcalls without asking with a normal values.
>  - Overcalls after asking with stronger hands ...
>
> I agree with Stefanie, that allowing people to vary agreements that
> depend on such things seems mad. It is hard to believe that the
> law-makers intended to encourage this kind of thing.

It is very hard to believe, but I do not see how the law can be read in any 
other way. Why would it be there if it did not mean exactly what Nigel 
suggests above?

>
> 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. Ordinary bidding and play provide a
> sufficient intellectual challenge for most players.
>
Well, players with better agreements will profit in a variety of ways. If 
the opponents have committed an infraction, it is quite appropriate to 
profit from it as best you can. Some people choose not to do so, and that is 
their right as well.

> A simple way of doing this would be to specify a single form of redress
> with no player options.

It seems that after something like a bid or play out of turn, or an 
insufficient bid, the option to accept it is needed, because after all, it 
is the only way the game can continue smoothly. Yet a NO cannot be forced to 
accept it, so...

Stefanie Rohan
London, England