[blml] 40B3, etc.²

[Jeff Easterson]

How often do you make insufficient bids?  I estimate that I (and my 
partners) do it less than once every two years.  I can't even remember 
the last time it happened. That is why I find it hard to believe that a 
pair will sit down and discuss how to change the meanings of their bids 
following their own insufficient bid. I don't mean logical (more or 
less) readings of bids, but really planned system changes.  Does anyone 
really do that? Kojak seems to think it is possible.  But, a purposely 
made insufficient bid (how to determine this?) would seem to me to be 
obviously illegal.  And I think, as a TD, if I suspect that such a bid 
has been purposely made  I'd question the perpetrator very closely. If I 
were to be convinced that the bid was purposely made I'd come down on 
him like a ton of bricks.
I'm afraid I don't understand your problem with penalty cards; could you 
clarify it with concrete examples?  Or do you mean that someone could 
possibly fabricate a penalty card intentionally in order to show count 
or whatever?  If it is inadvertent (not paying close attention, pulling 
the wrong card, etc.) it is surely random and thus hard for me to 
imagine how it could be used to transmit info, except for obvious stuff. 
  There are however rules regarding what is AI and UI for the partner of 
someone whon has a penalty card.  Ciao, JE
> 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 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> blml mailing list
> blml at amsterdamned.org
> http://www.amsterdamned.org/mailman/listinfo/blml