( ) Yes ( ) No
Describe the action that created the UI:
( ) Yes ( ) No
If yes, why?
If the law is not clear to you, then for each action consider the following: Would it have been obviously foolish, an egregious error, absurd, or would it be right quite often? If the last, it is a logical alternative.
Were any of the alternatives in step 3 logical alternatives?
( ) Yes ( ) No
Be sure to consider weighted adjustments per Law 12C1(c).
If the answer to any of these questions is "No" then the score cannot be adjusted under Law 16.
==============================================================Excerpts from the 2017 Laws of Duplicate Bridge, for reference:
When a player has available to him unauthorized information from his partner, such as from a remark, question, explanation, gesture, mannerism, undue emphasis, inflection, haste or hesitation, an unexpected alert or failure to alert, he must carefully avoid taking any advantage from that unauthorized information [see Law 16B1(a)].
Any extraneous information from partner that might suggest a call or play is unauthorized. This includes remarks, questions, replies to questions, unexpected alerts or failures to alert, unmistakable hesitation, unwonted speed, special emphasis, tone, gesture, movement or mannerism.
(a) A player may not choose a call or play that is demonstrably suggested over another by unauthorized information if the other call or play is a logical alternative.
(b) A logical alternative is an action that a significant proportion of the class of players in question, using the methods of the partnership, would seriously consider, and some might select.
UI Form version 1.6 -- July 3, 2020