Re: great idea -- explain own bids

On Apr 22, 9:26 am, gaze...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 (Kenny McCormack)
wrote:
> In article <6625855.a428v4s...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
> BBO expert  <n...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >blackshoe wrote:
>
> >> On Apr 22, 9:49 am, BBO expert <n...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >>> You excised the quote where Bob said the ACBL says "'explaining' a
call
> >>> by naming a convention is explicitly illegal".  Explaining a call by
> >>> naming a convention is not illegal, merely insufficient.
>
> >> Bob didn't say that, I did.
>
> >Sorry, my mistake.
>
> >> I have explained *why* I said it. I have
> >> nothing to add to that. If we continue to disagree, so be it.
>
> >We don't really disagree except in the little detail where you
> >said "explicitly illegal" - it simply isn't, and ACBL regs make that
clear.
> >If you say "Inverted Minor" in response to a request for an
explanation,
> >you haven't broken any rules - _yet_.  If you say no more, you've
failed to
> >give full disclosure.
>
> We seem to be reaching a level of pedantry here in RGB that would make
> CLC proud.  If you really care about such details, you should have said:
>
> If the opps ask for more information (or appear to be less than
> satisfied with the explanation) *and* you say no more, you've failed to
> give full disclosure.
>
> I know the nit-pickers will find room to nitpick the above, but the fact
> is that most of the time, in most clubs, with most reasonably
> experienced players, you can just say "Inverted", the opps nod
> appreciately, and life goes on.

Ahhh, another everyone is right! It is a wondrous universe where some
are more pigheaded, unreasonable, and unpleasantly right than others,
n'est-ce-pas?

I once answered with 3 fingers when someone raised an eyebrow after I
alerted a sup****t dbl.  Was it sufficient disclosure?  My opponent
apparently thought so.

== Bill Shutts