[blml] 40B3, etc.²

[Stefanie Rohan]

From: "Jeff Easterson"

> Perhaps I ought to clarify what was boggling the remnants of my mind.
> It was: that a pair could discuss what new conventions and meanings
> their bids would have after they themselves make an insufficient bid (or
> possibly other violation).  I couldn't imagine anyone actually doing
> this but it seems to be the point of the discussion about changes of
> meaning of bids after one's own insufficient (or other violation) bid.
> Ciao, JE

Obviously. Say the auction goes 1D by partner, 2C by RHO, 1S by you. Now you 
can play, eg, that double shows 4 spades and the lower end of a 1S response 
(let us assume that you do not want to pass and bar partner, so your bids 
will be as light as this. Another incidence of AI that ought to be UI, but 
anyway...)

2D can be either 10+ with 4 spades or 6-9 with 5+; 2H asks which.

2H can be 10+ with 5+ spades.

2S can be fit-showing.

Higher bids, well, who knows? NT bids can be natural, showing different 
ranges with 4 spades. 3-level bids can be game-going with a second suit. 
Etc.

These are all much more specific than a 1S response to an opening bid, so 
would, in theory, be permitted. Is 27D enough protection? When the director 
is not a strong player but the OS are? Besides, it is not clear that the 
result from this convention would

Is there any law at all that protects players from opponents' having a 
penalty card and using it to clarify their carding agreements? A reference 
suit and rank can make your carding a lot more accurate.


Stefanie Rohan
London, England