[blml] 40B3, etc.

[Alain Gottcheiner]

Eric Landau a écrit :
>
>
> Perhaps a real-life example (full disclosure: slightly modified to  
> suit) from a bit ago will help.  Partner opened 2S.  RHO undercalled  
> 2H.  When I brought this to her attention she immediately (and  
> predictably, in this environment) attempted to correct her IB to 3H  
> (old law); I was having none of that, and called the director.  Over  
> weak 2-bids, we play that free raises are constructive but not  
> forcing, game bids are to play, and all non-game-level jump bids are  
> game-forcing slam tries.  Relying on that last meta-agreement, I  
> accepted the 2H undercall and jumped to 3S, hoping partner would read  
> this as a game-forcing slam try.  He did, and we reached a slam that  
> we would not have found without the extra help from the IB.  The  
> routine post-mortem of this board during our post-session review made  
> it clear (as if it wasn't already) that my intended message had been  
> received and understood.
>
>   
Good example. And you could also have jumped to 4C/D.

> The next time we open a weak 2-bid and the opponent comes in with an  
> IB (surely not "extremely improbable"), we will know with absolute  
> certainty -- which we did not this first time -- that if we accept  
> the IB and raise partner's opening we will hold a slam try in  
> partner's suit. <snip> But that doesn't wash,because the ACBL does not permit partnership agreements of any kindwith respect to actions taken subsequent to an opponent's irregularity, 
>   
This seems specific to ACBL, because elsewhere, the rule is "no new 
agreement", not "no agreement", and you would be allowed to know what 
you know..

Best regards

Alain

(note that my point, that  it is very improbable that the same sequence 
happen again to you remains valid)