Re: What would you call this ?

william henderson wrote
>>>You're only required to describe your agreements, not your actual hand,
>nor what you "hope" partner will do
>
>Thanks for your reply.  That was my understandng , too but apparently
this is
>not the case at least on OKB.  At the start of every tournament, they
flash on
>the "instructions", " "No arrangement" is insufficient explanation".. 
Why so,
>if one must alert only the partner****p arrangement.?
>
>In the case in question, the director was called and we were penalised
>"because partner should hasve alerted his non-sayc bid as a penalty
double".
>THAT was NOT a partner****p arrangement.
>
>Where are we wrong in our surmise ?  Can anyone explain ?

   You are required to explain agreements.  OK, so why did you refuse to 
answer?

   Now, perhaps you were hard done by by the TD, but if you do not follow 
the rules you are going to cause problems.  You would have my complete 
sympathy if you had answered the question fully and correctly, and then 
been ruled against.  But your method is just asking for trouble.

-- 
David Stevenson            Wirral, Merseyside, UK       
<bridge2@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Special services:     Digital Postcard        
http://blakjak.com/postcard.htm
                       Currency Converter      
http://blakjak.com/curr_con.htm
                       Magical Translator      
http://blakjak.com/translt.htm