gordontd

The play period begins irrevocably once the auction and Clarification Period are over and the opening lead has been faced. That is the case in the situation originally presented in this thread. It is not the case in the L17E2 example you give.

He has nine cards.

Which bit of L17E2 refers to "once the opening lead has been faced"?

The EBU White Book lists the options it has chosen where they are offered, including: (j) Under Law 40C3 (a) a player is not allowed aids to memory, calculation or technique: for example, looking at the scores on the back of bidding cards during the hand is considered an aide-memoire and therefore illegal.

I agree with you on both points.

As I commented above, once the opening lead has been faced, the play period begins irrevocably. So we can't go back to the auction period.

I think this is one that is being looked at for improvement in the next set of Laws, but the way it's currently worded it seems to me that you have to cancel the board once the opening lead has been faced ("the play period begins irrevocably"), or if offender's partner has called after him, or if his LHO has called over him and he wishes to substitute a different call when faced with the correct hand.

It's not. Seeing a hand with 12 cards doesn't make the board unplayable. Seeing one with 14 cards usually does. Note that I'm not saying the hand with 12 cards is non-offending.

Does it?

OK, but there must come a point where something is so widespread that it becomes reasonable to omit it from an explanation unless specifically asked about. If asked about a forcing NT response to a 1H opener, should one have to say "forcing for one round but not necessarily strong, denies four spades, denies four or more hearts, won't have three hearts unless very weak or with invitational values"?

It wouldn't be unexpected, at least not to me. I've only ever had one partner with whom it didn't deny a four-card major, and then I certainly included that in my description.

I wonder if he's likely to know any more than the rest of us who "the bridge playing public" consists of. I'm not sure that I would take this as more accurate than the best guesses of the rest of us.

I think it should be described as "natural & forcing to...game/2NT/3m" according to agreement.

It is in the one I inhabit, although I recognise that others exist.

Then 5♠-5NT-7♦ seems possible if the opps don't bid any more.

No, that's not correct.

My guess is that what you really meant to ask about was:

If you are a member of an affiliated club you are automatically a member of the EBU, but that is not the case with the original poster. However you are correct that masterpoints will be issued nonetheless, and if his partners are members they will receive them on their records even if he is not a member.

There is only the one event in the calendar (comprising several sections such that everyone could play in something) with minimum masterpoint requirements. It seems right if that's its basis (masterpoints earned rather than self-assessed ability) to interpret it strictly, with the only exceptions being for those with substantial master point records abroad, or those invited to play up to avoid a half-table.

Looking around the room at tournaments, or at the clubs where you play, may support this idea but if you looked at the memberships of all bridge clubs in England you would find more women than men playing.

Do you mean East? I don't think I understand what any of this means.

Zia told me he had a game on Bridge Club Live, a popular English online site, with a friend of his and they scored about 42%. Just as he was leaving he was amused to receive a message from another player saying "I bet the real zmahmood wouldn't be impressed with that score!"

If you played a short club opening, your diamond raises would only need to be four-card suits. In fact if you only ever open a three-card diamond suit with 4432, I think with a hand like this you should just raise with only four anyway.

That's true in response to a major-suit opening, not 1♦ where the NT response is only a little wider in range than in standard.

Why was it not a penalty card?