BBO Discussion Forums: Footnotes - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Footnotes Laws of Duplicate Bridge

#1 User is offline   jallerton 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,796
  • Joined: 2008-September-12
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2011-November-18, 16:24

As I understand it, a new version of the Laws is published every ten years or so.

It seems that, sometimes, footnotes are added to the existing Laws.

Is the purpose of these footnotes merely to clarify something in the original version of the Laws? Or can a footnote be used to change the original meaning?
0

#2 User is offline   pran 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 5,052
  • Joined: 2009-September-14
  • Location:Ski, Norway

Posted 2011-November-18, 17:12

View Postjallerton, on 2011-November-18, 16:24, said:

As I understand it, a new version of the Laws is published every ten years or so.

It seems that, sometimes, footnotes are added to the existing Laws.

Is the purpose of these footnotes merely to clarify something in the original version of the Laws? Or can a footnote be used to change the original meaning?

Footnotes have usually been issued as part of, or immediately after the regular law revisions in order to clarify a rule.

Only exceptionally has a footnote been added between regular revisions. The most infamous footnotes in recent years have probably been those that in several changing versions were added to, and really changed the now extinct Laws 61B and 63B (Defenders may not ask one another about possible revokes).
0

#3 User is offline   bluejak 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,686
  • Joined: 2007-August-23
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Liverpool, UK
  • Interests:Bridge Laws, Cats, Railways, Transport timetables

Posted 2011-November-18, 19:35

They took the power to weight scores out at one time, and then issued a footnote that put it back in.
David Stevenson

Merseyside England UK
EBL TD
Currently at home
Visiting IBLF from time to time
<webjak666@gmail.com>
0

#4 User is offline   blackshoe 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 16,720
  • Joined: 2006-April-17
  • Location:Rochester, NY

Posted 2011-November-18, 23:16

Sort of an aside, but my copies of TFLB do not have numbered footnotes. Both the WBF version and the ACBL version use asterisks. Yet some people apparently have a law book with numbered footnotes, and they refer to "footnote number <whatever>" as if we should all know what the heck they're talking about. A bit annoying that. What should be done about it?
--------------------
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
0

#5 User is offline   pran 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 5,052
  • Joined: 2009-September-14
  • Location:Ski, Norway

Posted 2011-November-19, 04:38

View Postblackshoe, on 2011-November-18, 23:16, said:

Sort of an aside, but my copies of TFLB do not have numbered footnotes. Both the WBF version and the ACBL version use asterisks. Yet some people apparently have a law book with numbered footnotes, and they refer to "footnote number <whatever>" as if we should all know what the heck they're talking about. A bit annoying that. What should be done about it?

WBFLC Laws of 1997 had numbered footnotes, we did not in our Norwegian translation.

I suggested for the 2007 translation that we should maintain the same footnote numbers as were assigned by WBFLC, only to discover that WBFLC had abandoned their footnote numbering :P

"What should be done about it?" - Be aware of the situation.
0

#6 User is offline   pran 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 5,052
  • Joined: 2009-September-14
  • Location:Ski, Norway

Posted 2011-November-19, 04:44

View Postbluejak, on 2011-November-18, 19:35, said:

They took the power to weight scores out at one time, and then issued a footnote that put it back in.

I was thinking of the various amendments to Laws 61B and 63B, and consequences of violations of those laws. As far as I can remember weighting of scores was never a theme in any of those footnotes?
0

#7 User is offline   bluejak 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,686
  • Joined: 2007-August-23
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Liverpool, UK
  • Interests:Bridge Laws, Cats, Railways, Transport timetables

Posted 2011-November-21, 08:03

Look back over the years at Law 12C.
David Stevenson

Merseyside England UK
EBL TD
Currently at home
Visiting IBLF from time to time
<webjak666@gmail.com>
0

#8 User is offline   campboy 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,347
  • Joined: 2009-July-21

Posted 2011-November-22, 18:48

View Postblackshoe, on 2011-November-18, 23:16, said:

Sort of an aside, but my copies of TFLB do not have numbered footnotes. Both the WBF version and the ACBL version use asterisks. Yet some people apparently have a law book with numbered footnotes, and they refer to "footnote number <whatever>" as if we should all know what the heck they're talking about. A bit annoying that. What should be done about it?

There is a version with numbered footnotes (but not hyperlinks) on the EBU website here.
0

#9 User is offline   blackshoe 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 16,720
  • Joined: 2006-April-17
  • Location:Rochester, NY

Posted 2011-November-22, 23:36

I've grabbed it, thanks.
--------------------
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
0

Share this topic:


Page 1 of 1
  • 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