2017 Laws

[Dave Flower]

Does anyone have a reference to a list of significant changed implemented in the 2017 Laws ?

David Flower

[Barry Margolin]

Post by Dave Flower
Does anyone have a reference to a list of significant changed implemented in
the 2017 Laws ?

There's a version of the Laws with all the changes highlighted, but it
doesn't distinguish between real changes and minor editing. I don't know
of a summary of all the substantial changes -- my expectation is that
when various bridge leagues adopt it they'll publish something for their
members that summarizes them.

[Lorne]

Post by Dave Flower
Does anyone have a reference to a list of significant changed implemented in the 2017 Laws ?
David Flower

http://www.ebu.co.uk/documents/laws-and-ethics/articles/new-laws-changes.pdf

[[e-mail]]

Post by Lorne

Post by Dave Flower
Does anyone have a reference to a list of significant changed implemented in the 2017 Laws ?
David Flower

http://www.ebu.co.uk/documents/laws-and-ethics/articles/new-laws-changes.pdf

25 A3 was badly needed.

The number of aces in your hand must be authorized information to you. Before, at least in ACBL, if you discovered you had given the wrong BW answer because your partner gasped, you could not correct it.

Carl

[Steve Willner]

Post by ***@verizon.net
25 A3 was badly needed.
The number of aces in your hand must be authorized information to
you. Before, at least in ACBL, if you discovered you had given the
wrong BW answer because your partner gasped, you could not correct
it.

The new L25A3 merely codifies existing interpretation, and I don't see
different rulings being likely.

The critical decision the Director needs to make for L25A is whether
your call was intentional or not at the time it was made. If
unintentional, you can change it regardless of how you came to notice
the wrong call face up on the table. That was the practice before, and
now it's explicit.

If you give the wrong number of aces, usually that will be judged an
intentional call, and no change will be allowed. Circumstances could,
of course, allow a change in a specific case.

[[e-mail]]

Post by Steve Willner
If you give the wrong number of aces, usually that will be judged an
intentional call,

Why?

[Barry Margolin]

Post by Steve Willner
If you give the wrong number of aces, usually that will be judged an
intentional call,

Why?

Because it's usually a brain fart (miscounting, forgetting whether
you're playing 1430 or 3014), not a mispull.

[[e-mail]]

Post by Barry Margolin

Post by Steve Willner
If you give the wrong number of aces, usually that will be judged an
intentional call,

Why?

Because it's usually a brain fart (miscounting, forgetting whether
you're playing 1430 or 3014), not a mispull.
--
Barry Margolin
Arlington, MA

that is a *presumption*???

And if you responded 5H holding 3 bona fide aces?

Carl

[[e-mail]]

Post by ***@verizon.net

Post by Barry Margolin

Post by Steve Willner
If you give the wrong number of aces, usually that will be judged an
intentional call,

Why?

Because it's usually a brain fart (miscounting, forgetting whether
you're playing 1430 or 3014), not a mispull.
--
Barry Margolin
Arlington, MA

that is a *presumption*???
And if you responded 5H holding 3 bona fide aces?
Carl

But the serious question is not whether you can correct the bid. It is whether the fact that you have mis-stated the number of aces in your hand is authorized information to you.

Carl

[Bertel Lund Hansen]

Post by ***@verizon.net
But the serious question is not whether you can correct the
bid. It is whether the fact that you have mis-stated the
number of aces in your hand is authorized information to you.

Which source of this information do you imagine?

[[e-mail]]

Post by Bertel Lund Hansen

Post by ***@verizon.net
But the serious question is not whether you can correct the
bid. It is whether the fact that you have mis-stated the
number of aces in your hand is authorized information to you.

Which source of this information do you imagine?
--
Bertel
bertel.lundhansen.dk fiduso.dk obese.dk

Happens to me all the time. I notice later in the auction that the card I put down was not what I thought.

Carl

[Bertel Lund Hansen]

Post by ***@verizon.net
Happens to me all the time. I notice later in the auction that
the card I put down was not what I thought.

If it was not what you intended, you may change the card no
matter how you found out.

If it was intended in the split second when you placed the card,
a change is not allowed.

I'm not sure what precisely "thought" means in your sentence.

[[e-mail]]

Post by Bertel Lund Hansen

Post by ***@verizon.net
Happens to me all the time. I notice later in the auction that
the card I put down was not what I thought.

If it was not what you intended, you may change the card no
matter how you found out.
If it was intended in the split second when you placed the card,
a change is not allowed.
I'm not sure what precisely "thought" means in your sentence.
--
Bertel
bertel.lundhansen.dk fiduso.dk obese.dk

Exactly what I said: I think I have played the 5S spade card, and later notice it was 5H.

Carl

[Bertel Lund Hansen]

Post by ***@verizon.net
Exactly what I said: I think I have played the 5S spade card,
and later notice it was 5H.

That is a clear example of a case where you will be allowed to
change the call. The typical reaction from such a player is some
expression of surprise followed by "That is not what I meant to
bid."

[Barry Margolin]

Post by ***@verizon.net

Post by Bertel Lund Hansen

Post by ***@verizon.net
Happens to me all the time. I notice later in the auction that
the card I put down was not what I thought.

If it was not what you intended, you may change the card no
matter how you found out.
If it was intended in the split second when you placed the card,
a change is not allowed.
I'm not sure what precisely "thought" means in your sentence.
--
Bertel
bertel.lundhansen.dk fiduso.dk obese.dk

Exactly what I said: I think I have played the 5S spade card, and later notice it was 5H.

If it's legitimately a mispull, you can change it as an unintended call,
if you discover the error in time.

[Bertel Lund Hansen]

Post by ***@verizon.net
But the serious question is not whether you can correct the
bid. It is whether the fact that you have mis-stated the
number of aces in your hand is authorized information to you.

If you find out yourself, it is of course authorized, but I don't
see the point of this.

You cannot correct an intended bid that promises the wrong number
of aces. If you carefully choose the wrong card and place it on
the table and then discover your error, then you must present the
very best poker face that you can manage. You must not let
partner know that you have made an error, and you will not be
allowed to replace the call. Even calling the TD would be wrong
(but inexperienced players may be forgiven for doing that).

[[e-mail]]

Post by Bertel Lund Hansen

Post by ***@verizon.net
But the serious question is not whether you can correct the
bid. It is whether the fact that you have mis-stated the
number of aces in your hand is authorized information to you.

If you find out yourself, it is of course authorized, but I don't
see the point of this.

Because if partner exhibits surprise and signs off, you would normally be barred from continuing.

Carl

[Bertel Lund Hansen]

Post by ***@verizon.net
Because if partner exhibits surprise and signs off, you would
normally be barred from continuing.

Yes? It doesn't matter if you already yourself discovered the
error. You may not choose the obvious line if that is
demonstrably suggested by UI if you have a logical alternative.
You're not always barred. With no logical alternative you may
make a call that your partner on his knees has begged you to
make.

Many people think that a player who gets UI, is supposed to
pretend that he doesnt' know the UI. That is wrong. But that is
an explanation I give to inexperienced players because they would
be confused by a correct explanation. I always add: "That is not
entirely correct, but it will do for you."

[[e-mail]]

Post by Bertel Lund Hansen

Post by ***@verizon.net
Because if partner exhibits surprise and signs off, you would
normally be barred from continuing.

Yes? It doesn't matter if you already yourself discovered the
error. You may not choose the obvious line if that is
demonstrably suggested by UI if you have a logical alternative.

And what action is demonstrably suggested by my partner's surprise at my bid?

Carl

[Bertel Lund Hansen]

Post by ***@verizon.net
And what action is demonstrably suggested by my partner's
surprise at my bid?

Make another call.