[TimG]

jdonn, on Apr 8 2008, 04:00 PM, said:

What is the exact wording of the law? If what he said isn't law it should be, but I think 'technically' it isn't. But I won't say anything definitive till someone shows me (I'm blocked from seeing it at work).

Law16A:

Quote

After a player makes available to his partner extraneous information that may suggest a call or play, as by means of a remark, a question, a reply to a question, or by unmistakable hesitation, unwonted speed, special emphasis, tone, gesture, movement, mannerism or the like, the partner may not choose from among logical alternative actions one that could demonstrably have been suggested over another by the extraneous information.

[jdonn]

TimG, on Apr 8 2008, 07:14 PM, said:

jdonn, on Apr 8 2008, 04:00 PM, said:

What is the exact wording of the law? If what he said isn't law it should be, but I think 'technically' it isn't. But I won't say anything definitive till someone shows me (I'm blocked from seeing it at work).

Law16A:

Quote

After a player makes available to his partner extraneous information that may suggest a call or play, as by means of a remark, a question, a reply to a question, or by unmistakable hesitation, unwonted speed, special emphasis, tone, gesture, movement, mannerism or the like, the partner may not choose from among logical alternative actions one that could demonstrably have been suggested over another by the extraneous information.

So indeed what he said is not really the law. Choosing an alternative that isn't logical is not choosing "from among logical alternative actions". So what am I missing? I reiterate that I think it's normal to rule as he is saying, and I agree that what he says is how things should be. I'm just looking for any legal backup...

[TimG]

jdonn, on Apr 8 2008, 07:38 PM, said:

TimG, on Apr 8 2008, 07:14 PM, said:

jdonn, on Apr 8 2008, 04:00 PM, said:

What is the exact wording of the law? If what he said isn't law it should be, but I think 'technically' it isn't. But I won't say anything definitive till someone shows me (I'm blocked from seeing it at work).

Law16A:

Quote

After a player makes available to his partner extraneous information that may suggest a call or play, as by means of a remark, a question, a reply to a question, or by unmistakable hesitation, unwonted speed, special emphasis, tone, gesture, movement, mannerism or the like, the partner may not choose from among logical alternative actions one that could demonstrably have been suggested over another by the extraneous information.

So indeed what he said is not really the law. Choosing an alternative that isn't logical is not choosing "from among logical alternative actions". So what am I missing? I reiterate that I think it's normal to rule as he is saying, and I agree that what he says is how things should be. I'm just looking for any legal backup...

I understand exactly what you are saying. I think the answer lies in a liberal interpretation of "logical" meaning more along the lines of "possible". I suppose any insufficient bid would be illogical...

[Halo]

"73 C.

Player Receives Unauthorised Information from Partner

When a player has available to him unauthorised information from his partner,
as from a remark, question, explanation, gesture, mannerism, special
emphasis, inflection, haste or hesitation,he must carefully avoid taking any
advantage that might accrue to his side."

I don't think selecting a call in the hope of getting round Law 16 absolves you from Law 73.

[Free]

Nice poll: 3 popular answers

[skjaeran]

mikeh, on Apr 8 2008, 11:36 PM, said:

I hope that everyone concerned applauded opener for her ethics... while I hope that most would be as ethical, we all know that some are not, and, anyway, when an ethical player goes for 800 as a result of her good ethics, recognition helps..

In the 2nd round of our national club teams championship I had UI on a deal - I was so deep in thought about how to best get my hand off the chest that I forgot that my natural 2♦ call was indeed conventional. I bid to 7NT, knowing we missed 3 keycards, as partner needed to have them all as he bid over my presumed natural and non-forcing bid. I could count 13 tricks. I went for -800 (-2000 was there if LHO found the best lead). If LHO had held ♥K/Kx I'd in fact have made the contract!