[blml] L26 or not

[Henri DEFRANCHI]

26 B..... Withdraw call does not specify a suit....





> Message du 17/03/08 14:32
> De : "ton" 
> A : "'Bridge Laws Mailing List'" 
> Copie à : 
> Objet : Re: [blml] L26 or not
> 
> 
> > ton:
> > Interesting question, should be on the agenda for the 2018 laws. It 
> > seems reasonable to create a connection between L27, 26, 32 and others 
> > to make UI the decisive factor for rectifications.
> > 
> > Assume in this example coming from Fearghal that East replaces 4H by 
> > 5H, showing the same 2 aces. In our new laws West then is allowed to 
> > make any call, but what about law 26? I am afraid that the lead 
> > penalties apply, which in my opinion should not be the case. May I 
> > have your opinion about the idea to combine lead penalties with L27B1:
> > if no further rectification in 27B1 then also no lead penalty.
> > I you agree you need patience.
> 
> I'm patient ;-)
> 
> But, should the prase "the auction proceeds without further rectifications"
> in L27B1 not be read as "Law 26 will not apply" ??
> 
> Peter
> 
> 
> ton:
> Difficult not to get you ashamed: L26 is not applied during the auction
> (waiting for the reply that the opening lead is done during the auction
> period).
> 
> Let me anticipate another reaction. In 27B2 and 27B3 a reference to L26 is
> made. Does that not imply that in B1 it doesn't? 
> 
> In the past we have said that L26 is an 'absolute law', applying whenever an
> offending side has withdrawn a call. This means that a reference is not
> needed. We might need to reconsider this approach in this case. 
> 
> ton
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> blml mailing list
> blml at amsterdamned.org
> http://www.amsterdamned.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
> 
> 

Riton from Marseille
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.amsterdamned.org/pipermail/blml/attachments/20080318/2f091338/attachment.htm