From rfrick at rfrick.info Fri Apr 13 21:06:45 2018 From: rfrick at rfrick.info (Robert Frick) Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2018 15:06:45 -0400 Subject: [BLML] Is an agreement an agreement? Message-ID: Your partner opens 2 Diamonds, RHO asks, and you explain it as a weak two. RHO bids 2NT and it is your call. You hold X Qx KJxxx 98xxx You are playing with your partner for the first time. He came late, so there was no time to talk about hardly anything. You gave him your card, which said 2 Diamonds is weak. It's not clear how much time he had to look at the card, but it wasn't much, and it's not clear what he read. Or remembered. It's probably more common here to play 2D as Flannery, 4-5 in the majors with an opening hand. So, first question, what do you bid? The player decided to pass. I think that's a reasonable bid, given the high probability that partner might have the Flannery hand. And, second question, did she fulfill her legal obligations to explain partner's bid? If not, what should she have said? From petrus at stift-kremsmuenster.at Fri Apr 13 22:24:34 2018 From: petrus at stift-kremsmuenster.at (Petrus Schuster OSB) Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2018 22:24:34 +0200 Subject: [BLML] Is an agreement an agreement? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, 13 Apr 2018 21:06:45 +0200, Robert Frick wrote: > > Your partner opens 2 Diamonds, RHO asks, and you explain it as a weak > two. RHO bids 2NT and it is your call. You hold > > X > Qx > KJxxx > 98xxx > > > You are playing with your partner for the first time. He came late, so > there was no time to talk about hardly anything. You gave him your card, > which said 2 Diamonds is weak. It's not clear how much time he had to > look at the card, but it wasn't much, and it's not clear what he read. > Or remembered. It's probably more common here to play 2D as Flannery, > 4-5 in the majors with an opening hand. > > So, first question, what do you bid? > > The player decided to pass. I think that's a reasonable bid, given the > high probability that partner might have the Flannery hand. > > And, second question, did she fulfill her legal obligations to explain > partner's bid? If not, what should she have said? What she knows: that the card says weak, but that they did not discuss it and partner may not have noticed or remembered. > _______________________________________________ > Blml mailing list > Blml at rtflb.org > http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml > -- Erstellt mit Operas E-Mail-Modul: http://www.opera.com/mail/ From mikeandelayne at gmail.com Sat Apr 14 01:28:41 2018 From: mikeandelayne at gmail.com (Mike Meakin) Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2018 23:28:41 +0000 Subject: [BLML] Is an agreement an agreement? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Maybe you should have also said that it was the first time you had played! Almost anything you do now could be influenced by that knowledge. If it was a regular partnership what would you bid? My guess would be 4/5D! Any other bid at this time may be considered fielding! You know that your partner has got it wrong but every now and again they might not, therefore bid 5D suck up the bad result and either gloat over your own integrity or shout at partner.? Mike On Fri, 13 Apr 2018, 21:52 Petrus Schuster OSB, < petrus at stift-kremsmuenster.at> wrote: > On Fri, 13 Apr 2018 21:06:45 +0200, Robert Frick > wrote: > > > > > Your partner opens 2 Diamonds, RHO asks, and you explain it as a weak > > two. RHO bids 2NT and it is your call. You hold > > > > X > > Qx > > KJxxx > > 98xxx > > > > > > You are playing with your partner for the first time. He came late, so > > there was no time to talk about hardly anything. You gave him your > card, > > which said 2 Diamonds is weak. It's not clear how much time he had to > > look at the card, but it wasn't much, and it's not clear what he read. > > Or remembered. It's probably more common here to play 2D as Flannery, > > 4-5 in the majors with an opening hand. > > > > So, first question, what do you bid? > > > > The player decided to pass. I think that's a reasonable bid, given the > > high probability that partner might have the Flannery hand. > > > > And, second question, did she fulfill her legal obligations to explain > > partner's bid? If not, what should she have said? > > What she knows: that the card says weak, but that they did not discuss it > and partner may not have noticed or remembered. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Blml mailing list > > Blml at rtflb.org > > http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml > > > > > -- > Erstellt mit Operas E-Mail-Modul: http://www.opera.com/mail/ > _______________________________________________ > Blml mailing list > Blml at rtflb.org > http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.rtflb.org/pipermail/blml/attachments/20180413/a281c1eb/attachment.html From mikeamostd at btinternet.com Sat Apr 14 03:03:46 2018 From: mikeamostd at btinternet.com (Mike Amos) Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2018 02:03:46 +0100 Subject: [BLML] Is an agreement an agreement? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <000401d3d38c$712af840$5380e8c0$@btinternet.com> It can't possibly be correct to tell your opponents that your agreement is that 2D is a Weak Two unless it is your agreement. Your player doesn't know if the partner read the card or knows the agreement. He should tell the opponents what he knows. "We agreed to play what's on my card which says that 2D is weak. My partner arrived late and we had no time to discuss. I don't know if he read the card. I don't know what he thinks. Please call the TD who may be able t(So help you" You the TD can send the floundering partner away from the table and explain to the opponents that they are allowed to ask the 2D opener if they believe the partnership does have an agreement. They can't ask what he holds, and if the partnership does not have an agreement, that is what they should be told. You don't tell us the hands or the outcome, but it seems to me that a player who tells his opponents that his partner's bid shows a Weak Two in Diamonds and then proceeds to act on the basis that it might be Flannery (apologies for the F-word) is unlikely to be in a strong position if the opponents claim to have been damaged by MI. To be honest I think this is a simple situation which should be well handled by a Club Director. Mike -----Original Message----- From: blml-bounces at rtflb.org On Behalf Of Robert Frick Sent: 13 April 2018 20:07 To: Bridge Laws Mailing List Subject: [BLML] Is an agreement an agreement? Your partner opens 2 Diamonds, RHO asks, and you explain it as a weak two. RHO bids 2NT and it is your call. You hold X Qx KJxxx 98xxx You are playing with your partner for the first time. He came late, so there was no time to talk about hardly anything. You gave him your card, which said 2 Diamonds is weak. It's not clear how much time he had to look at the card, but it wasn't much, and it's not clear what he read. Or remembered. It's probably more common here to play 2D as Flannery, 4-5 in the majors with an opening hand. So, first question, what do you bid? The player decided to pass. I think that's a reasonable bid, given the high probability that partner might have the Flannery hand. And, second question, did she fulfill her legal obligations to explain partner's bid? If not, what should she have said? _______________________________________________ Blml mailing list Blml at rtflb.org http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml From hildalirsch at gmail.com Sat Apr 14 04:36:37 2018 From: hildalirsch at gmail.com (Richard Hills) Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2018 12:36:37 +1000 Subject: [BLML] Is an agreement an agreement? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Petrus Schuster: What she knows: that the card says weak, but that they did not discuss it and partner may not have noticed or remembered. Richard Hills: Yes, a unilateral system card created by one partner is not necessarily a prior mutual understanding of both partners. This point is made clear by the new 2017 Law 75D. Best wishes, Hilda R. Lirsch Sent from my iPad > On 14 Apr 2018, at 6:24 AM, Petrus Schuster OSB wrote: > > What she knows: that the card says weak, but that they did not discuss it > and partner may not have noticed or remembered. From jean-pierre.rocafort at meteo.fr Sat Apr 14 23:08:49 2018 From: jean-pierre.rocafort at meteo.fr (ROCAFORT Jean-Pierre) Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2018 23:08:49 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [BLML] Is an agreement an agreement? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0A3490E8-2DFD-474D-A795-FBED07B49E05@meteo.fr> > Le 13 avr. 2018 ? 21:06, "Robert Frick" a ?crit : > > > Your partner opens 2 Diamonds, RHO asks, and you explain it as a weak two. RHO bids 2NT and it is your call. You hold > > X > Qx > KJxxx > 98xxx > > > You are playing with your partner for the first time. He came late, so there was no time to talk about hardly anything. You gave him your card, which said 2 Diamonds is weak. It's not clear how much time he had to look at the card, but it wasn't much, and it's not clear what he read. Or remembered. It's probably more common here to play 2D as Flannery, 4-5 in the majors with an opening hand. > > So, first question, what do you bid? I don't nid, i pass > > The player decided to pass. I think that's a reasonable bid, given the high probability that partner might have the Flannery hand. > > And, second question, did she fulfill her legal obligations to explain partner's bid? If not, what should she have said? Easy, what you wrote above Jpr > _______________________________________________ > Blml mailing list > Blml at rtflb.org > http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml From janpeach8 at bigpond.com Sun Apr 15 03:38:32 2018 From: janpeach8 at bigpond.com (Jan Peach) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 11:38:32 +1000 Subject: [BLML] Is an agreement an agreement? In-Reply-To: <000401d3d38c$712af840$5380e8c0$@btinternet.com> References: <000401d3d38c$712af840$5380e8c0$@btinternet.com> Message-ID: <6755029BD9B64336B44089F8F67B28DD@PeachPC> -----Original Message----- From: Mike Amos Sent: Saturday, April 14, 2018 11:03 AM To: 'Bridge Laws Mailing List' Subject: Re: [BLML] Is an agreement an agreement? It can't possibly be correct to tell your opponents that your agreement is that 2D is a Weak Two unless it is your agreement. Your player doesn't know if the partner read the card or knows the agreement. He should tell the opponents what he knows. "We agreed to play what's on my card which says that 2D is weak. My partner arrived late and we had no time to discuss. I don't know if he read the card. I don't know what he thinks. Please call the TD who may be able t(So help you" You the TD can send the floundering partner away from the table and explain to the opponents that they are allowed to ask the 2D opener if they believe the partnership does have an agreement. They can't ask what he holds, and if the partnership does not have an agreement, that is what they should be told. .................................................................. Jan: Where is the authority for the director to do this? WBFLC Lille 1998; If a player knows that his partner?s call is conventional but says he cannot recall what was actually agreed the Director may in his discretion send the player away from the table and allow the partner to tell opponents in his absence what the agreement is. The Director must be called and no action may be taken before he arrives. The partner continues in the action on the basis that the player has understood his call, and does not use the unauthorized information that his partner is uncertain of the meaning. The Director is strongly urged to remain at the table whilst the hand is completed. This procedure is only for the exact circumstances described; it does not apply when the player says that the position is undiscussed or there is no agreement. ................................. You don't tell us the hands or the outcome, but it seems to me that a player who tells his opponents that his partner's bid shows a Weak Two in Diamonds and then proceeds to act on the basis that it might be Flannery (apologies for the F-word) is unlikely to be in a strong position if the opponents claim to have been damaged by MI. To be honest I think this is a simple situation which should be well handled by a Club Director. Mike -----Original Message----- From: blml-bounces at rtflb.org On Behalf Of Robert Frick Sent: 13 April 2018 20:07 To: Bridge Laws Mailing List Subject: [BLML] Is an agreement an agreement? Your partner opens 2 Diamonds, RHO asks, and you explain it as a weak two. RHO bids 2NT and it is your call. You hold X Qx KJxxx 98xxx You are playing with your partner for the first time. He came late, so there was no time to talk about hardly anything. You gave him your card, which said 2 Diamonds is weak. It's not clear how much time he had to look at the card, but it wasn't much, and it's not clear what he read. Or remembered. It's probably more common here to play 2D as Flannery, 4-5 in the majors with an opening hand. So, first question, what do you bid? The player decided to pass. I think that's a reasonable bid, given the high probability that partner might have the Flannery hand. And, second question, did she fulfill her legal obligations to explain partner's bid? If not, what should she have said? _______________________________________________ Blml mailing list Blml at rtflb.org http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml _______________________________________________ Blml mailing list Blml at rtflb.org http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml From hildalirsch at gmail.com Sun Apr 15 10:34:47 2018 From: hildalirsch at gmail.com (Richard Hills) Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 18:34:47 +1000 Subject: [BLML] Is an agreement an agreement? In-Reply-To: <6755029BD9B64336B44089F8F67B28DD@PeachPC> References: <000401d3d38c$712af840$5380e8c0$@btinternet.com> <6755029BD9B64336B44089F8F67B28DD@PeachPC> Message-ID: I agree with Jan Peach. During the auction a player is NOT permitted to receive two explanations of an opposing call from BOTH opponents. Only if one opponent gives a non-explanation (for example, "I know that we have a pre-existing mutual partnership understanding, but I have temporarily forgotten what it is.") may the Director send that opponent away from the table and require the other opponent to describe the system meaning of the call. Of course, during the Correction Period both members of the putative declaring side MUST contradict each other (and summon the Director) if they have differing memories of their pre-existing mutual partnership understandings. Best wishes, Richard Hills Sent from my iPad > On 15 Apr 2018, at 11:38 AM, Jan Peach wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Mike Amos > Sent: Saturday, April 14, 2018 11:03 AM > To: 'Bridge Laws Mailing List' > Subject: Re: [BLML] Is an agreement an agreement? > > It can't possibly be correct to tell your opponents that your agreement is > that 2D is a Weak Two unless it is your agreement. Your player doesn't know > if the partner read the card or knows the agreement. He should tell the > opponents what he knows. "We agreed to play what's on my card which says > that 2D is weak. My partner arrived late and we had no time to discuss. I > don't know if he read the card. I don't know what he thinks. Please call > the TD who may be able t(So help you" > > You the TD can send the floundering partner away from the table and explain > to the opponents that they are allowed to ask the 2D opener if they believe > the partnership does have an agreement. They can't ask what he holds, and > if the partnership does not have an agreement, that is what they should be > told. > .................................................................. > > Jan: > Where is the authority for the director to do this? > > WBFLC Lille 1998; > If a player knows that his partner?s call is conventional but says he cannot > recall > what was actually agreed the Director may in his discretion send the player > away > from the table and allow the partner to tell opponents in his absence what > the > agreement is. The Director must be called and no action may be taken before > he > arrives. > The partner continues in the action on the basis that the player has > understood his > call, and does not use the unauthorized information that his partner is > uncertain of > the meaning. > The Director is strongly urged to remain at the table whilst the hand is > completed. > This procedure is only for the exact circumstances described; it does not > apply > when the player says that the position is undiscussed or there is no > agreement. > > > ................................. > > You don't tell us the hands or the outcome, but it seems to me that a player > who tells his opponents that his partner's bid shows a Weak Two in Diamonds > and then proceeds to act on the basis that it might be Flannery (apologies > for the F-word) is unlikely to be in a strong position if the opponents > claim to have been damaged by MI. > > To be honest I think this is a simple situation which should be well handled > by a Club Director. > > Mike > > -----Original Message----- > From: blml-bounces at rtflb.org On Behalf Of Robert > Frick > Sent: 13 April 2018 20:07 > To: Bridge Laws Mailing List > Subject: [BLML] Is an agreement an agreement? > > > Your partner opens 2 Diamonds, RHO asks, and you explain it as a weak two. > RHO bids 2NT and it is your call. You hold > > X > Qx > KJxxx > 98xxx > > > You are playing with your partner for the first time. He came late, so there > was no time to talk about hardly anything. You gave him your card, which > said 2 Diamonds is weak. It's not clear how much time he had to look at the > card, but it wasn't much, and it's not clear what he read. Or remembered. > It's probably more common here to play 2D as Flannery, 4-5 in the majors > with an opening hand. > > So, first question, what do you bid? > > The player decided to pass. I think that's a reasonable bid, given the high > probability that partner might have the Flannery hand. > > And, second question, did she fulfill her legal obligations to explain > partner's bid? If not, what should she have said? > _______________________________________________ > Blml mailing list > Blml at rtflb.org > http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml > > _______________________________________________ > Blml mailing list > Blml at rtflb.org > http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml > > _______________________________________________ > Blml mailing list > Blml at rtflb.org > http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml From adam at tameware.com Thu Apr 19 15:23:53 2018 From: adam at tameware.com (Adam Wildavsky) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 07:23:53 -0600 Subject: [BLML] ACBL Memphis (Spring 2012) Casebook published with panelist comments Message-ID: http://web2.acbl.org/casebooks/2012MemphisCasebook.pdf More should follow soon! As usual, to discuss a specific case please start a new thread with the casebook name and case number in the Subject. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.rtflb.org/pipermail/blml/attachments/20180419/1219d2f2/attachment.html From adam at tameware.com Thu Apr 19 15:27:15 2018 From: adam at tameware.com (Adam Wildavsky) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 07:27:15 -0600 Subject: [BLML] ACBL Memphis (Spring 2012) Casebook published with panelist comments In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: All the casebooks can be found here: http://www.acbl.org/tournaments_page/nabcs/past-nabcs/nabc-casebooks/ Draft comments for casebooks that do not yet have panelist comments incorporated are here: http://bit.ly/acbl-casebook-draft-comments On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 7:23 AM, Adam Wildavsky wrote: > http://web2.acbl.org/casebooks/2012MemphisCasebook.pdf > > More should follow soon! > > As usual, to discuss a specific case please start a new thread with the > casebook name and case number in the Subject. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.rtflb.org/pipermail/blml/attachments/20180419/44192cf2/attachment.html