[jeffford76]

mycroft, on 2013-August-22, 11:19, said:

This one ranks right up there with "If you wish, you can accept the pass and open in second seat. If you choose not to, the auction will revert to the dealer, which is you, and you can open in first seat [and fourth-hand will pass at first opportunity]." I can *see* a situation where I would want to open in second seat (system issues mean I have a bid in 2nd that I don't have/isn't as clear in 1st) but it never happens.

Funny, I almost always accept. Then I'm likely to have a normal auction, as opposed to making my opening and then having LHO do whatever crazy thing they feel like knowing their partner will pass once.

[fbuijsen]

gnasher, on 2013-August-22, 07:48, said:

Law 50E3 tells us (I think) what to do when someone gains, relative to the original equity, by the use of this AI.

The way I read the wording, it's actually a bit stronger than that. It says that if the NOS is damaged by the information from seeing the MPC, the TD should adjust. lamford's quest here seems to be to determine how far that goes. Intuitively I think it means that if the NOS is damaged compared to the outcome without any offense happening, the TD should adjust. If the use of the AI under 50E1 results in the offenders getting the score they would have gotten without the offense (rather than the horrible score resulting from making the offense and not being allowed to use the information about the MPC), then there is no need to adjust, since the overall handling of the situation has not resulted in damage for the NOS compared to the outcome if no offense occurred.

[fbuijsen]

gnasher, on 2013-August-22, 07:48, said:

Law 50E3 tells us (I think) what to do when someone gains, relative to the original equity, by the use of this AI.

The way I read the wording, it's actually a bit stronger than that. It says that if the NOS is damaged by the information from seeing the MPC, the TD should adjust. lamford's quest here seems to be to determine how far that goes. Intuitively I think it means that if the NOS is damaged compared to the outcome without any offense happening, the TD should adjust. If the use of the AI under 50E1 results in the offenders getting the score they would have gotten without the offense (rather than the horrible score resulting from making the offense and not being allowed to use the information about the MPC), then there is no need to adjust, since the overall handling of the situation has not resulted in damage for the NOS compared to the outcome if no offense occurred.