explaining to layman

[Liu I Nan]

I need help to explain 27 D to laymen  :(.  The case was there was an insufficient bid, offender decide to take a putt at 3NT (penalty: partner forced to pass), make 11 tricks and the non-offenders are claiming damage after looking at the travellers, claiming that had there been no enforced pass they might end up in slam and gone down.  I know 27D is not to be applied that way but I have trouble explaining it in words that they could understand.  please help.

[Peter Busch]

Law 27D only allows adjustments after a 27B1(a) or 27B1(b) correction (i.e. non-conventional IB replaced with non-conventional lowest sufficient in same suit; or IB replaced with call of same or more precise meaning). It sounds like your player made a correction under 27B2, so Law 27D does not apply.

Peter

[bluejak]

Of course Peter is correct, but I doubt that will make the players who are complaining to Liu happy.

The problem is that a lot of people believe that if their opponents do something wrong then they should gain.  But the trouble with that is that people would basically refuse to play on.  You have to give people some incentive.

Legally, you could say that in Liu's case, why does Law 23 not apply [which is mentioned in Law 27B2]?.

The point is that after an insufficient bid the lawmakers have decided that play should continue with certain restrictions.  So long as those restrictions are followed, the offending side can then do its best on the hand, and see what happens.

If a player who has made an insufficient bid now corrects it to something that silences partner he is taking a complete gamble.  On balance, this is good for his opponents, because if he made five insufficient bids during a session, he would probably finish with at least three bad scores.  But he is allowed the gamble, and occasionally it gains.

Actually, this is generally the case.  When there is an infraction, and the Laws provide some correction to let play continue, the offenders often lose - but not always.

The lawmakers do not allow the player to gain in two cases.  First, is if the player makes a bid under Laws 27B1A or 27B1B that allows partner to bid, if the pair reach a contract that could not be reached without the insufficient bid then Law 27D allows it to be adjusted.

Second, is if a player makes an insufficient bid in a position where he could easily see it would gain to make an insufficient bid, eg by silencing partner, then Law 23 allows it to be adjusted.

But if a player just gains through dumb luck and guesswork, that's life!