[blml] Zone 7 LC interprets Law 27 [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

[richard.hills at immi.gov.au]

Summary of Zone 7 Laws Committee Law 27 interpretations
by Arie Geursen, CTD New Zealand:

Law 27B1(a)
Not conventional and corrected by lowest
sufficient bid in same denomination

* As before, a player is still permitted to replace an
insufficient bid with a bid in the same denomination at
the lowest legal level without restriction provided that,
in the opinion of the Director, neither the insufficient
bid nor the substituted bid is artificial.

* The auction continues normally and the information
that the bid was intended to be natural is authorised
to all players at the table and therefore Law 16D does
not apply.

Law 27B1(b)
Corrected with a call that has the
same, or more precise meaning.

* In addition, players are also permitted to substitute
other legal calls without restriction (even if they are
artificial) provided that, in the opinion of the
Director the selected call has:

* the same meaning as the insufficient bid or;

* a more precise meaning than the insufficient bid
(i.e. the replacement conveys the same or more
precise information).

Law 27B2
Corrected by any legal call not permitted
under Law 27B1

* Unless permitted under Law 27B1, if the
insufficient bid is corrected by a sufficient bid
or a pass, the offender’s partner must pass
whenever it is his turn to call. Laws 23 & 26
may apply

Law 27B1 or B2
Correct Procedure

* In order for the Director to correctly exercise this
discretion, he/she must first determine the
offending player’s original intent at the time of the
infraction and then investigate the pair's methods.

* This will often entail quizzing the players away from
the table and/or an examination of the pair’s system
card. Only after these investigations should the
Director then explain the options.

Note that:

* A truly unintentional action may be corrected via Law 25.

* If the Director is unclear whether to allow the correction
without restriction under Law 27B1(b), or to require the
offender’s partner to pass throughout the remainder of the
auction under Law 27B2, the Director is advised to err on the
side of applying Law 27B1(b) but stand ready to apply 27D.

* I.e. the inclination of the Director ought to be on obtaining a
normal bridge result wherever possible.

Law 27D
Non-offending side Damaged

* When you allow correction of an insufficient bid without
restriction, you should always advise the non-offending side to
call you back at the end of play if they consider that the
outcome may have been different had the offender’s partner not
had the assistance of the withdrawn bid.

* If so, the score should be adjusted to the most likely
outcome(s), had the insufficient bid not occurred.

* Under no circumstances may any weight be given to the
perceived benefit that might have accrued to the non-offending
side if the Director had elected to bar the partner from the
auction (even if it subsequently transpires, that it may have been
the more appropriate action, i.e. it is not a Directors’ error).

Law 27B3
Replacement with a double not
permitted under Law 27B1.

Except as allowed for under Law 27B1, if
the offender attempts to substitute a
double or redouble for his insufficient bid,
the double or redouble is cancelled and the
offender must instead substitute a
sufficient bid or pass. Now his partner must
pass whenever it is his turn to call. Law 23
and 26 may apply.

Law 27B4
Replacement with another Insufficient
Bid

If the offender attempts to substitute one
insufficient bid with another insufficient
bid, unless LHO accepts it, the 2nd call is
cancelled and he must substitute a sufficient
bid or pass (but not a double or re-double)
and his partner must pass whenever it is his
turn to call. Law 23 and 26 may apply.

Law 27C
Premature Replacement of an
Insufficient Bid.

If the offender attempts to replace his
insufficient bid before the Director has
ruled on rectification, LHO may still accept
the insufficient bid otherwise the
substitution stands and the Director either
applies 27B1 or 27B2 to the substitution.

*Note: This happens a lot

Insufficient bid - Examples

West East
1S   3S
4NT  4D

If the Director is satisfied that East was
answering Blackwood but at the wrong
level, then East will be allowed to correct
to 5D without any restriction.

West North East
1D   1S    1H

* If 1H was intended to show at least four hearts and enough
HCP to respond, then a replacement of 2H is permitted
under Law 27B1(a) without any further restriction.

* Alternatively, if a negative double by East would
systemically guarantee at least a four-card heart holding,
then East could also replace the 1H with a double under Law
27B1(b) without restriction.

* However, a pass would not convey a heart suit and
therefore Law 27B2 applies, i.e. partner will have to pass
whenever it is his/her turn to call and Laws 23 and 26 may
also apply.

West North East
1NT  2S    2D

* If East's intention was to transfer to
hearts (he did not see the 2S bid), then a
replacement bid of 3H would not bar his
partner.

West North East
1NT  2D    2C

* 2C was intended as simple Stayman. A Lebensohl-type
cue bid replacement of 3D (asking about a
four-card major) would now have the same
meaning as the original insufficient bid and thus
not bar West.

* Alternatively, if the Director is satisfied that the
player intended to bid 3C naturally, he/she allows
that change without restriction under Law
27B1(b).

West East
2NT  2H

* If 2H was intended as a transfer, then a
bid of 3H (still transferring) would permit
the auction to continue without
constraints.

West North East
1S   2H    1NT

* The substitution of 2NT is permitted without restriction under Law
27B1(a) if both 1NT and 2NT are natural.

* The information that East's HCP range might well be different from that
of an original 2NT response is authorised to both sides but Law 27D will
apply if the offending side achieves a favourable result that would not
have been possible without the infraction (such as stopping in 2NT when
it makes only eight tricks if played by East).

* The replacement of 1NT with 2NT also is permitted without restriction
under Law 27B1(b) if the Director is satisfied that this was East's
original incontrovertible intention.

Insufficient Bid
How to proceed at the table

Summary:

Most insufficient bids arise from either a failure to observe the call of
RHO or a general confusion about the current level of the auction.
Therefore, in applying Law 27, the Director should proceed as follows:

1. Remove the offender from the table and determine his/her original
intent and the specific meaning of the intended call (take a peek if that
avoids having to take the offender from the table every time).

2. Verify the general methods of the partnership and, if necessary,
consult the offender's system card or any other system notes.

3. Determine the possible replacement calls available and their meaning.

4. Return to the table and explain all the options to the players
(including that LHO has the option of accepting the insufficient
bid as per Law 27A).

5. Allow the (fully informed) player to select a replacement call and
then, based upon the investigations detailed in steps (1)-(3),
apply either Law 27B1 or Law 27B2.

6. If Law 27B1 is applied, inform the non-offending side of their
right to apply for an adjusted score at the end of play if they
believe that the outcome of the board would have been different
without the assistance of the insufficient bid.


Best wishes

Richard James Hills
Graduates and Developmental Training Section
Department of Immigration and Citizenship
Telephone: 02 6223 9067
Email: richard.hills at immi.gov.au

Important Notice: If you have received this email by mistake, please advise
the sender and delete the message and attachments immediately.  This email,
including attachments, may contain confidential, sensitive, legally
privileged and/or copyright information.  Any review, retransmission,
dissemination or other use of this information by persons or entities other
than the intended recipient is prohibited. DIAC respects your privacy and
has obligations under the Privacy Act 1988. The official departmental
privacy policy can be viewed on the department's website at www.immi.gov.au
See: http://www.immi.gov.au/functional/privacy.htm