[blml] Proposed new Dutch definition of the word agreement

[Robert Frick]

On Wed, 14 May 2008 04:29:59 -0400, Alain Gottcheiner <agot at ulb.ac.be>  
wrote:

> Guthrie a écrit :
>>
>> Hence there is a strong counter-argument for the Dutch position.
>>
>> There are many benefits of defining a *standard* system (as suggested
>> previously). For example, the Dutch would be able to have their cake and
>> eat it.
>>   - If you adopt the standard system, you can forget your agreements
>> without penalty. That takes care of beginners and pick-up partnerships.
>>   - If, instead, you agree your own system, then forgetting an agreement
>> is treated as misexplanation rather than misbid.
>>
>>
>> The best of all worlds :)
>>
>>
>>
> [AG]
> Except for three points :
>
> 1) It goes against L40A and L75B. No OB may change any article of Law.
>
> 2) How do you differentiate a misbid from a mispull, a psyche or not
> having seen opponent's bid ? If you begin penalizing players who pulled
> 2H in lieu of 2S, because partner couldn't explain the bid, you'll
> rapidly end up with no players. Remember the explanation must cover what
> is in the system, not in the player's hand. And if you don't penalize
> mispulls, players will begin claiming they mispulled when they forgot
> the system. The liars against which the Dutch federation is working with
> their ruling won't shy away from this.

It seems to me that the critical distinction is between a psyche and an  
unintentional misbid, and that in practice these are usually easy to  
distinguish. For example, I open 1H third seat not vulnerable with Kxxx of  
hearts an no other HCP.

The only example I know of where they are not easily distinguished is a 2C  
response to 1 of a major on a two-card suit (playing Standard American).  
It was described to me as a tactical bid, and I was not happy. In  
retrospect perhaps the 2C bid was Drury. But if it was meant as Drury,  
then there was UI from the lack of alert. To make a ruling on that, you  
have to make the same decision anyway as to the intended meaning of the 2C  
bid.

Yes, it could be difficult to distinguish a mispull from other bids, but  
players usually claim their mispull, and then the director has to make  
that decision about the bidder's intention anyway.

Bob