[bluejak]

Its quality. It is just a question of deciding the borderline, like LA.

[blackshoe]

Fair enough, I suppose, though it seems awfully vague.

[Vampyr]

blackshoe, on 2011-March-15, 09:51, said:

Fair enough, I suppose, though it seems awfully vague.

It does, yes. I think that Edgar Kaplan once said that a "serious error" in this context could also be called absurd, a totally obvious blunder, something a beginner wouldn't do (this last I am not sure is from Kaplan; I may have heard it somewhere else).

I think that Lamford is right. A strong player who took what he later realised was an anti-percentage line would feel that he had made a "serious error". This is not the same thing as "SE" from SEWOG.

Didn't the Law used to use "egregious"? It seems much more appropriate.

[bluejak]

Egregious is a word not much used in this country that was part of the North American interpretation of when to deny redress. Not only was it not part of the Law, but it was not felt to convey the flavour of the rules in the rest of the world. Since then this area has changed considerably both in North America and the rest of the world.