[Ranmit]

May not be a very realistic scenario, but came up for discussion:

Is a pair allowed to have different meanings for a X over a 1NT based on who bid the 1NT ('dbl Bob for penalty but not John')?

Essentially
1NT (by S) X = Penalty
1NT (by N) X = 4M 5m?

Someone argued that it violates 40A4 ("The agreed meaning of a call or play shall not alter by reference to the member of the partnership by whom it is made")- but I dont think it does. The meaning is not changing based on who is making the double, since

1NT (by S) X = Penalty, irrespective of whether E or W makes the X
1NT (by N) X = 4M 5m, irrespective of whether E or W makes the X


so I feel 40A4 should not be applicable.

Would you allow the system?

[jillybean]

Allowed.

And interestingly, from the commentary on the laws
The option for a Regulating Authority to allow a member of a partnership to play one or more elements of the system differently from his partner has been removed.

[barmar]

jillybean, on 2026-January-28, 09:31, said:

And interestingly, from the commentary on the laws
The option for a Regulating Authority to allow a member of a partnership to play one or more elements of the system differently from his partner has been removed.

I think that was a reaction to "caddy systems". When an experienced player is playing with a newbie (often a caddy at the midnight zips, back when they still existed), many of the caddy's bids would be transfers while the expert's bids were natural, so the expert would always declare.

[mycroft]

Probably still allowed in the Midnights :-).

But this was around forever, and was taken out for more lucrative reasons. There's a quote in Helen Sobel's "All the Tricks!" (revised ed 1965!) (from memory; I'm sure I lost my copy over 15 years ago, but it's the kind of memory one doesn't forget) where she discussed system with another strong player prior to the National event.

"*Your* 1NT range is 15 to 17. *My* NT range is 14-18."