[blml] My draft comments on the non-NABC+ cases from Detroit

[David Grabiner]

"Guthrie" <Guthrie at NTLworld.com> writes:

> [Adam]
> 2. I see no merit to the appeal. Yes, 4H might have gone down fewer,
> but laws do not give the offenders the benefit of the doubt and in any
> case, there was likely little or no difference between -300 and -200.
>
> [Nige1]
> If the committee change the directors ruling to a milder ruling, as
> here, then to me it is obvious that the appeal is justified. In fact if
> the committee disagree with the directors argument or ruling in any
> substantial way, I feel that the appeal is justified. For example, even
> if the committee change it to a harsher ruling, I think it is justified.
> I think you should be allowed to appeal a ruling if you think you got
> away too lightly.

I would say that if the committee changes, or considers changing, the ruling to 
be potentially in your favor, your appeal must have merit.  "Potentially in your 
favor" covers a score which is changed from average-minus to -620; you may have 
had a legitimate case that average-minus was wrong and you were entitled to 
either +100 or -620.  Similarly, if the TD rules 3NT making for -600, and you 
appeal because 3NT is not a likely contract and the AC rules that 4S is the 
likely contract for -620, your appeal has merit, as the issue of changing the 
contract was decided in your favor.

However, if you get -500, appeal seeking a better score, and the AC rules that 
you should have been -800, your appeal can be without merit.