[blml] Law 27B1(b) - 16D exclusion.

[gesta at tiscali.co.uk]

Grattan Endicott<gesta at tiscali.co.uk
[following address discontinued:
grandeval at vejez.fsnet.co.uk]
*************************
"we that live to please 
  must please to live"
        ~ Dr Samuel Johnson
*************************
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Reg Busch" <rbusch at ozemail.com.au>
To: "Bridge Laws Mailing List" <blml at amsterdamned.org>
Sent: Sunday, May 04, 2008 8:41 AM
Subject: Re: [blml] Law 27B1(b) - 16D exclusion.


> gesta at tiscali.co.uk wrote:
> 
>>>
> I hope I have misunderstood this. Are you saying 
> that, if 27B1(a) applies, then we always rule under 
> this, and never go on to 27B1(b)?  If this pair were 
> playing 4 card mjors, I would offer the IBer his rights 
> under B1(a), and also suggest he may have alternative 
> actions available under B1(b) e.g. some sort of 
> artificial game forcing bid which conveys the same 
> meaning..
> Reg
> 
+=+  When a player has options the Director must 
explain all the options to him. (Law 10C1). So you 
are right to point to all the possibilities.  
         After receiving the explanation the player 
selects his call. If it is the lowest sufficient bid in the 
same denomination Law 27B1(a) applies. If it is not 
the lowest sufficient bid in the same denomination 
then either 27B1(b) or 27B2, or 27B3, or 27B4 will 
apply. So it is also right that when 27B1(a) applies to 
his selected option you never go to 27B1(b), nor to 
any of 27B2, 27B3, 27B4. 
                           ~ Grattan ~   +=+.