Re: great idea -- explain own bids

Bob wrote
>My idea is this. When there is partner****p uncertainty about the
>meaning of a bid, the bidder should explain the meaning of his/her bid
>to the opps (and not to partner).
>
>I think this is what happens in online bridge. I liked that. I try to
>bring it to face-to-face bridge as much as I can. For example, my
>partner opens 2D. We are a hastily formed partner****p and as far as I
>know have not agreed on the meaning of the bid.
>
>I just leave the table and let partner explain it to the opps. I
>believe they should know the meaning of my partner's bid, even if I
>don't. I don't want to gain any advantage over the opps because they
>don't know the meaning of that bid. I am almost positive they like
>this system better than hearing me say "no agreement". If my partner
>and I are on the wrong wavelength, they can watch the fun and punish
>us if it gets too comical.
>
>It doesn't come up that often, so I don't think it will look like a
>jack-in-the-box convention at the local bridge club.
>
>Fire away.

   I prefer to play by the Laws.  That way I ma not building some unseen 
advantage for myself by not doing so.

-- 
David Stevenson           Bridge      RTFLB       Cats       Railways
Liverpool, England, UK    Fax: +44 870 055 7697        ICQ:  20039682
<webjak666@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>                             bluejak on OKB
                           Bridgepage: http://blakjak.org/brg_menu.htm