headers
Henk Uijterwaal | 1 Sep 2006 01:01
Favicon

BLML Usage statistics

BLML usage statistics for August 2006

Posts   From
-----   ----

_______________________________________________
blml mailing list
blml <at> amsterdamned.org
http://www.amsterdamned.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Henk Uijterwaal | 1 Sep 2006 01:01
Favicon

List of BLML Abbreviations

(Automated, regular posting)

              Usenet Bridge Abbreviations

ABF        Australian Bridge Federation
AC         Appeals committee
ACBL       American Contract Bridge League
AI         Authorised information
ArtAS      Artificial adjusted score
AssAS      Assigned adjusted score
ATF        Across-the-field [matchpointing]
ATTNA      Appeal to the National Authority
BBL        British Bridge League [now defunct]
BGB        Bridge Great Britain
BIT        Break in Tempo
BLML       Bridge-laws mailing list
BoD        Board of directors [ACBL]
BoG        Board of governors [ACBL]
BOOT       Bid-Out-Of-Turn
CD         Convention Disruption
C&E        Conduct and ethics [often hearings]
CC         Convention card
CHO        Center Hand Opponent [ie partner]
CoC        Conditions of contest
COOT       Call-Out-Of-Turn
CoP        Code of practice
CPU        Concealed partnership understanding
CTD        Chief Tournament director
DBF        Danish Bridge Federation
DIC        Director in charge
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Henk Uijterwaal | 6 Sep 2006 11:52
Picon
Favicon

The list is back

Dear All,

As you may have noticed, BLML was offline for a month.  What happened
was that during my vacation, the mailing list software crashed.  This
wasn't noticed until I return from my vacation on 14/8.  However, when
I tried to restart it, it crashed again.  I had some of the operators
here look at the problem, nobody could find it and they referred me to
the real mailman expert.  This person had, unfortunately, left for his
summer vacations two days before I returned.  He came back Monday and
fixed this.

The list is now up and running again, all mail sent to the list since
it went down should have been buffered and will be processed in the
next couple of hours.  If you don't see it by tomorrow morning, send
it again.

Sorry about all this,

Henk

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Henk Uijterwaal                           Email: henk.uijterwaal(at)ripe.net
RIPE Network Coordination Centre          http://www.amsterdamned.org/~henk
P.O.Box 10096          Singel 258         Phone: +31.20.5354414
1001 EB Amsterdam      1016 AB Amsterdam  Fax: +31.20.5354445
The Netherlands        The Netherlands    Mobile: +31.6.55861746
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1160438400 + 381600 = 1160820000.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Alain Gottcheiner | 6 Sep 2006 12:56
Picon
Picon
Favicon

Re: Is it still working?

At 21:47 13/08/2006 +0100, David Martin wrote:
>

 > Is it still working?

I had some qualms, too. Apparently, only inertia or the sudden PMFIsation 
of all appeals can explain the sudden hush on blml.

Best regards

     Alain

_______________________________________________
blml mailing list
blml <at> amsterdamned.org
http://www.amsterdamned.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Alain Gottcheiner | 6 Sep 2006 13:13
Picon
Picon
Favicon

Re: Law 25A

At 11:49 6/08/2006 +0200, Sven Pran wrote:
>I was consulted (on telephone) on a case on which I would like to hear
>opinions on blml, preferably from those that feel themselves competent on
>the application of law 25A:
>
>The auction: (North dealer, bid boxes in use, no screens)
>N    E    S    W
>1C - P - 1D - P
>1H - P - 2S - P
>2NT - P - P - P
>
>Immediately after West's final pass, before any activity associated with the
>opening lead, South exclaims: "God, what have I done" or words to that
>effect.
>
>Facts (undisputed) as established by the Director: 2S is forcing to game
>(4th suit), there is no doubt that South intended to bid game, i.e. 3NT, and
>that his pass as such was "unintended". (I am deliberately avoiding the word
>"inadvertent" here).
>
>Question: Shall South be permitted a Law 25A substitution of 3NT for his
>last pass?
>
>"Disturbing" circumstances:
>
>We have since long practiced a general (but not necessarily absolute) rule
>in Norway that for a call to be considered inadvertent its bid card should
>normally "come" from the same compartment in the bid box as the bid card for
>the intended call. (Pass, Double and Redouble come from one compartment, all
>bids come from a different compartment).
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Rui Marques | 6 Sep 2006 13:20
Picon
Favicon
Gravatar

Re: Law 25A

If the director judges that South took the bidding card of Pass intending to
take the 3NT, then we can rule as inadvertent. Seems strange. At the moment
he passed, it seems from a distance that South intended to pull that card
from the box... Slip of fingers, inadvertent, slip of mind, "Im very sorry
but...". I would tend to judge as not inadvertent. But the TD at the table
is the one that has to form the opinion about it, about the reasons why
Southpicked the wrong card. Normally I ask something like "Yes, you wanted
to be in game of course, but you passed because it seemed like it was
already 3NT the contract?" Or some variations of it. Usually this
establishes a reply like "of course, I would never pass if I had noticed it
was only 2NT", and this means of course intentional.

Rui Marques

-----Original Message-----
From: blml-bounces <at> amsterdamned.org [mailto:blml-bounces <at> amsterdamned.org]
On Behalf Of Sven Pran
Sent: Sunday, August 06, 2006 10:50 AM
To: blml
Subject: [blml] Law 25A

I was consulted (on telephone) on a case on which I would like to hear
opinions on blml, preferably from those that feel themselves competent on
the application of law 25A:

The auction: (North dealer, bid boxes in use, no screens)
N    E    S    W
1C - P - 1D - P
1H - P - 2S - P
2NT - P - P - P
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Henri DEFRANCHI | 6 Sep 2006 12:50
Picon

long long time

BLML is back...I enjoy that!!!!!

Regards

_______________________________________________
blml mailing list
blml <at> amsterdamned.org
http://www.amsterdamned.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Herman De Wael | 6 Sep 2006 13:46
Picon

welcome back

As well as the list, I have had serious troubles with my e-mails over 
the past few months.

Anyway, we've been to Verona and Warszawa.

Warszawa saw us holding 13 appeals, that is one more than 2 years ago 
in Malmö.

And we've put the 2005 appeals in a booklet on-line at :

http://www.eurobridge.org/departments/appeals/Appeals2005.pdf

No doubt that will keep you busy!
-- 
Herman DE WAEL
Antwerpen Belgium
http://www.hdw.be

--

-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.11.7/438 - Release Date: 5/09/2006

_______________________________________________
blml mailing list
blml <at> amsterdamned.org
http://www.amsterdamned.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Peter Eidt | 6 Sep 2006 14:09
Picon
Favicon

Re: Law 25A

Hi Sven,

it sounds like a classic example for 25 B, so ...

no correction under 25 A !

Peter

From: "Sven Pran" 
> I was consulted (on telephone) on a case on which I would like to hear
> opinions on blml, preferably from those that feel themselves competent
> on the application of law 25A:
> 
> The auction: (North dealer, bid boxes in use, no screens)
> N    E    S    W
> 1C - P - 1D - P
> 1H - P - 2S - P
> 2NT - P - P - P
> 
> Immediately after West's final pass, before any activity associated
> with the opening lead, South exclaims: "God, what have I done" or
> words to that effect.
> 
> Facts (undisputed) as established by the Director: 2S is forcing to
> game (4th suit), there is no doubt that South intended to bid game,
> i.e. 3NT, and that his pass as such was "unintended". (I am
> deliberately avoiding the word "inadvertent" here).
> 
> Question: Shall South be permitted a Law 25A substitution of 3NT for
> his last pass?
> 
> "Disturbing" circumstances:
> 
> We have since long practiced a general (but not necessarily absolute)
> rule in Norway that for a call to be considered inadvertent its bid
> card should normally "come" from the same compartment in the bid box
> as the bid card for the intended call. (Pass, Double and Redouble come
> from one compartment, all bids come from a different compartment).
> 
> I believe I have heard that Law 25B2(b)(2) was introduced because of a
> situation where a player was so disappointed by his partner's response
> to a Blackwood asking bid that he lost all hopes of slam but
> "inadvertently" passed instead of correcting the contract to 5 in the
> agreed trumps. At that time his mistake shall have been ruled not to
> qualify for a correction under Law 25A?

_______________________________________________
blml mailing list
blml <at> amsterdamned.org
http://www.amsterdamned.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Sinot Martin | 6 Sep 2006 14:47

Re: Law 25A

The Dutch interpretation of Law 25A when using bidding boxes is that it
is meant to correct mechanical errors: the hand does something different
than the mind. This is usually caused by things like sticking bidding
cards, or grabbing the card next to the intended one. It falls to the TD
to determine whether such is the case. When the intended call and the
actual call come from different compartments of the box, the TD usually
does not allow the change. But there are exceptions, such as pulling a
"green" Stop card before making a jump bid. Anyway, the TD should take
that person from the table and question him/her about the reason of the
"mispull" and possibly look at the hand for additional information
before making a decision.

For this case I would say that at the moment of his pass, South thought
for some reason that he was passing 3NT, and just a little too late
found out that that still had to be bid. Proof of that would be the
compartment the pass comes from, and also his exclamation, which to me
shows that he really wanted to pass at the time of his mistake, probably
thinking that the contract was already 3NT. I would not allow the
change. This would be a 25B case if West hadn't passed already.

This is similar to someone passing an ace-asking answer who forgets to
bid the agreed trump indeed; there can be no doubt that that person does
not want to play the ace-asking answer suit, but he/she had a momentary
black-out.

Regards,
-- 
Martin Sinot

> -----Original Message-----
> From: blml-bounces <at> amsterdamned.org
[mailto:blml-bounces <at> amsterdamned.org]
> On Behalf Of Sven Pran
> Sent: Sunday, August 06, 2006 11:50
> To: blml
> Subject: [blml] Law 25A
> 
> I was consulted (on telephone) on a case on which I would like to hear
> opinions on blml, preferably from those that feel themselves competent
on
> the application of law 25A:
> 
> The auction: (North dealer, bid boxes in use, no screens)
> N    E    S    W
> 1C - P - 1D - P
> 1H - P - 2S - P
> 2NT - P - P - P
> 
> Immediately after West's final pass, before any activity associated
with
> the
> opening lead, South exclaims: "God, what have I done" or words to that
> effect.
> 
> Facts (undisputed) as established by the Director: 2S is forcing to
game
> (4th suit), there is no doubt that South intended to bid game, i.e.
3NT,
> and
> that his pass as such was "unintended". (I am deliberately avoiding
the
> word
> "inadvertent" here).
> 
> Question: Shall South be permitted a Law 25A substitution of 3NT for
his
> last pass?
> 
> "Disturbing" circumstances:
> 
> We have since long practiced a general (but not necessarily absolute)
rule
> in Norway that for a call to be considered inadvertent its bid card
should
> normally "come" from the same compartment in the bid box as the bid
card
> for
> the intended call. (Pass, Double and Redouble come from one
compartment,
> all
> bids come from a different compartment).
> 
> I believe I have heard that Law 25B2(b)(2) was introduced because of a
> situation where a player was so disappointed by his partner's response
to
> a
> Blackwood asking bid that he lost all hopes of slam but
"inadvertently"
> passed instead of correcting the contract to 5 in the agreed trumps.
At
> that
> time his mistake shall have been ruled not to qualify for a correction
> under
> Law 25A?
> 
> Comments anybody? (I am deliberately not disclosing my own opinion or
the
> ruling actually made except that they do agree).
> 
> Regards Sven
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> blml mailing list
> blml <at> amsterdamned.org
> http://www.amsterdamned.org/mailman/listinfo/blml

_______________________________________________
blml mailing list
blml <at> amsterdamned.org
http://www.amsterdamned.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |

Gmane