BBO Discussion Forums: Lack of Alert that Shouldn't Cause Damage - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

  • 4 Pages +
  • « First
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Lack of Alert that Shouldn't Cause Damage UK

#61 User is offline   dburn 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,154
  • Joined: 2005-July-19

Posted 2010-May-21, 17:03

bluejak, on May 21 2010, 05:26 PM, said:

I thought it was quite obvious what I meant to say.

Whether in the current case failure to notice that he had passed is a serious error is a bridge judgement decision: therefore it is reasonable to find out what players' bridge judgement on the matter is.

I am still baffled. What aspect of "bridge judgement" do you believe is exercised in determining whether or not a player has passed at some stage during the auction?
When Senators have had their sport
And sealed the Law by vote,
It little matters what they thought -
We hang for what they wrote.
0
  • 4 Pages +
  • « First
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users