aguahombre Posted April 28, 2013 Report Share Posted April 28, 2013 This strikes me as fairly straightforward....And, eight pages later, we all tried to make it as complicated as possible; and I still agree with the ruling. N/S had a lucky accident. We don't like it when the opponents have a lucky accident. Next. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cascade Posted April 28, 2013 Report Share Posted April 28, 2013 But that's not a real problem. By ignoring the literal wording of 16B1b, they're doing what was almost certainly intended. So changing the Law would simply bring the words into conformance with actual practice, not actually change any rulings. As I wrote in a different forum what appears to be intended is flawed: "The obvious and IMO serious flaw in this ammendment is that there is no verifiable way to determine the methods of the partnership after a misbid." In the example that began this thread if I open 2NT with a strong balanced hand that is well outside my system then there is no way to determine what my methods are after this misbid and therefore no way to determine what my logical alternatives are. The actual wording has the benefit of making it clear what on what the logical alternatives are based. Secondly, it is outside proper procedure to rule according to the intent given that the director is "bound" by the laws. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vampyr Posted April 29, 2013 Report Share Posted April 29, 2013 But that's not a real problem. By ignoring the literal wording of 16B1b, they're doing what was almost certainly intended. So changing the Law would simply bring the words into conformance with actual practice, not actually change any rulings. It's not a problem that a Law has to be ignored in order to produce what is universally considered sensible procedure? Really? Should this apply only to 16B1b, or also to whatever other Laws we personally (or as a ZA*) don't like? *Of course there is one ZA that just gets the Laws changed to what it likes. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barmar Posted April 29, 2013 Report Share Posted April 29, 2013 Ruling on LAs after misbids is tricky. Someone playing the actual methods of the partnership wouldn't be in the situation in the first place. We're not ignoring laws we "don't like". We're re-interpreting laws whose literal interpretation is obviously wrong. Yes, the difference is subjective, what's wrong with that? One of the nice things about being human rather than a robot is we can make judgement calls like this. And when the judgement is shared almost universally, that's good enough to go by. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vampyr Posted April 29, 2013 Report Share Posted April 29, 2013 Ruling on LAs after misbids is tricky. Someone playing the actual methods of the partnership wouldn't be in the situation in the first place. We're not ignoring laws we "don't like". We're re-interpreting laws whose literal interpretation is obviously wrong. Yes, the difference is subjective, what's wrong with that? One of the nice things about being human rather than a robot is we can make judgement calls like this. And when the judgement is shared almost universally, that's good enough to go by. Well, it's good enough for government work I guess. Are you by any chance a civil servant? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billw55 Posted April 29, 2013 Report Share Posted April 29, 2013 We're not ignoring laws we "don't like". We're re-interpreting laws whose literal interpretation is obviously wrong. Yes, the difference is subjective, what's wrong with that? One of the nice things about being human rather than a robot is we can make judgement calls like this. And when the judgement is shared almost universally, that's good enough to go by.+1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.