[blml] 40B3, etc.

[Eric Landau]

On Mar 21, 2008, at 5:57 AM, Alain Gottcheiner wrote:

> Eric Landau a écrit :
>> On Mar 20, 2008, at 10:47 AM, Alain Gottcheiner wrote:
>>
>>> Eric Landau a écrit :
>>>
>>>>>> The point, of course, is that even if you make no explicit
>>>>>> agreements
>>>>>> about RCs after specific IBs, you may be forced by  
>>>>>> circumstance to
>>>>>> develop implicit agreements over time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> IBTD. The probability that a honest pair will do the same IB  
>>>>>> in the
>>> same
>>> context twice in a row is pretty low.
>>>
>> But if it is illegal to have an agreement, then you break the law
>> just by having an agreement, regardless of how low the probability of
>> your actually exercising it (and, critically, regardless of whether
>> you could have avoided it).
>>
> IBTD. Very low probabilities should be discarded IRL, or you wouldn't
> dare open a can.

But as a matter of morality we are expected not to break the law even  
when there is a very low probability of being caught.

> Before we had an implicit agreement, the same situation must happen at
> least twice. Before we could use it, a third time.

In sensible RAs, I suppose.  But in the ACBL, a second occurence can  
be deemed prima facie evidence that the first occurence established  
an implicit agreement (as in the infamous "one psych per partnership  
per lifetime" rule).

> I claim that this is extremely improbable in the case of IBs, to the
> point that it probably didn't happen to any honest pair in the history
> of bridge. YMMV as to the assessment of this probabitlity, but if you
> admit that this probability is as low a I think it is, then we should
> address more imoprtant problems.

That is quite true in the current context, where we are talking about  
a partnership's actions subsequent to its own IB.  But the same  
principles, and the same law (L40B3), apply equally to a  
partnership's actions subsequent to an opponent's IB.  For the latter  
to recur is closer to inevitable than to "extremely improbable", and  
we cannot afford to ignore the questions it raises, or, for many of  
us, fail to address the dilemma foisted on us by our RA's  
promulgation of a nonsensical regulation that cannot logically be  
followed.


Eric Landau
1107 Dale Drive
Silver Spring MD 20910
ehaa at starpower.net