[Hanoi5]

16.A1.d What kind of authorized information can a player have about the hand he will play BEFORE he extracts the cards from the board?

17.D2 & 3 The LHO and the Offender have to repeat their calls (the LHO over the new call from offender and offender with the previously wrong cards on probably a new situation), why doesn't the same mechanism that with change of calls applies? I mean, if a call is changed to one with a pretty similar meaning it stays, why can't the same rule be applied to these situations?

[pran]

Hanoi5, on 2011-April-27, 14:18, said:

17.D2 & 3 The LHO and the Offender have to repeat their calls (the LHO over the new call from offender and offender with the previously wrong cards on probably a new situation), why doesn't the same mechanism that with change of calls applies? I mean, if a call is changed to one with a pretty similar meaning it stays, why can't the same rule be applied to these situations?

L17D2:
The board is considered destroyed, and the Director shall award an artificial adjusted score if:
Offender's partner has called after offender made the call that was cancelled
or if:
Offender's LHO has called after offender made the call that was cancelled unless offender repeated his cancelled call after seeing the correct hand.

The board is considered rescued, and auction (and play) may continue normally after offender sees his correct hand if:
no player had called after offender's call that was cancelled (regardless of offender's new call)
or if:
offender's LHO alone had called after the cancelled call provided offender repeated this call after seeing his correct cards. (In that case LHO must repeat the call he had made the first time.)

clear?

regards Sven

PS: Similarly L17D3: The board from which offender saw the incorrect hand is considered destroyed unless when played as scheduled the offender makes exactly the same call as he made the first time he saw these cards.

PPS: About Law 16A1{d}: The inclusion of this particular paragraph under law 16A1, or rather the heading in L16A1, is unfortunate.
L16A1{d} was introduced with the 2007 revision of the laws and the intention was to make it clear that no information a player possesses before he looks at his cards is unauthorized unless explicitly declared as unauthorized in law. Such information is not neccessarily related to the board he is about to play.

Information covered by L16A1{d} includes such items as partnership agreements and understandings, conditions of contest, published (intermediate) results etc.

[aguahombre]

Hanoi5, on 2011-April-27, 14:18, said:

16.A1.d What kind of authorized information can a player have about the hand he will play BEFORE he extracts the cards from the board?

vulnerability, dealer designation, Opponents' style, etc, etc, etc, etc.

[Hanoi5]

pran, on 2011-April-27, 16:02, said:

Information covered by L16A1{d} includes such items as partnership agreements and understandings, conditions of contest, published (intermediate) results etc.

aguahombre, on 2011-April-27, 20:54, said:

vulnerability, dealer designation, Opponents' style, etc, etc, etc, etc.

I thought these laws might be related. For example, RHO is dealer and opens 1NT, but it turns out he took the cards from another board, when we get to play that board I have the 'knowledge' that offender opened 1NT on that hand.