Re: Quick question for any directors out there please.

Robin Barker wrote:

> On 30 Apr, 17:06, BBO expert <n...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> Except that in this case, the director's ruling appears to be that the
>> _bid_ was illegal, not any followups - and since the following bid was
>> natural, I would think it should have been permitted whether or not the
>> regulation was
>> Ro18 or Ro19.  So while _you_ don't ban such bids, some EBU directors
>> seem to.
> 
> They don't have to use the follow ups for the agreement to be illegal.
> 
> If the regulation was Ro19
> and if the partner****p agreement was to open 1S on this Ro18 hand
> and if the partner****p agreement was to (say) play 1S-4NT as Blackwood
> then the 1S bid was illegal.

Ah.  I see.  A small distinction, but crucial, since responder could
essentially never use conventions as he wouldn't know whether opener was
subminimum.