[vigfus]

Hello Everyone.
I have many times tried to read upload Law 75 to players at the table when irregularity has occured.
Unfortunaetly when I do, I can not read the direct text of the law because it is explaining actual case in A,B,C.
Also, I feel that Law 75 is not clear enough when describing what to do and why. BTW. I am almost sure about how to rule as the Law wants the TD's to give right rulings.

Here I have made some enhanchments to Law 75 (With help from other Major TD), and I would be very pleased to hear yours opinions about Law 75 changes.

Greetings

Vigfus Palsson. Iceland.

-------------------------

LAW 75: MISTAKEN EXPLANATION OR MISTAKEN CALL

When a player gets information from partner’s explanation of his call, which is not as he meant it, the knowledge of that is “Unauthorised information” (see Law 16A). The player must be careful to avoid taking any advantage from that unauthorized information (see Law 73C). If he does, the Director shall award an adjusted score. When mistaken explanation results in damage to opponents, the Director shall award an adjusted score. The Director is to presume mistaken explanation, rather than mistaken call, in the absence of evidence to the contrary.

Here is a case to explain this Law.

North has opened 1NT and South, who holds a weak hand with long diamonds, has bid 2 ♦, intending to sign off; North explains, however, in answer to West’s inquiry, that South’s bid is strong and artificial, asking for major suits.

In this case misleading explanation has been given to the opponents. The responsibilities of the players (and the Director) are to minimize the damage caused.

A. Mistake Causing Unauthorized Information
Whether or not North’s explanation is a correct statement of partnership agreement, South, having heard North’s explanation, knows that his own 2 ♦ bid has been misinterpreted. This knowledge is “unauthorized information”, so South must be careful to avoid taking any advantage from that unauthorized information. For instance, if North rebids two no trump, South has the unauthorized information that this bid merely denies a four-card holding in either major suit; but South’s responsibility is to act as though North had made a strong game try opposite a weak response, showing maximum values.

B. Mistaken Explanation
The actual partnership agreement is that 2 ♦is a natural signoff. The mistake was in North’s explanation. This explanation is an infraction of Law, since East-West are entitled to an accurate description of the North-South agreement.

Correct time to call the Director
If North subsequently becomes aware of his mistake, he must immediately notify the Director. South must do nothing to correct the mistaken explanation while the auction continues.

After the final pass. If South becomes declarer or dummy, he should call Director before the opening lead is faced, and volunteer a correction of the explanation of 2 ♦, and Law 21B1a may apply.

After the final pass. If South becomes a defender he must say nothing until the end of play as any comment will alert his partner to the problem during the play. At the end of the hand he must call the Director and explain the problem.

C. Mistaken Call
The partnership agreement is as explained. 2 ♦ is strong and artificial. The mistake was in South’s call. There is no infraction of Law, since East-West did receive an accurate description of the North-South agreement. They have no claim to an accurate description of the North-South hands. (Regardless of damage, the Director shall allow the result to stand.) South must not correct North’s explanation (or notify the Director)