Minutes of the Meeting of the WBF Laws Committee
		Lille, Flanders  30 August 1998

Present:
	Ton Kooijman		Chairman
	Grattan Endicott	Secretary
	Virgil Anderson
	Joan Gerard 		(for part of the Meeting)
	Santanu Ghosh		(for part of the Meeting)
	Becky Rogers
	William Schoder
	John Wignall
	Chip Martell
	Chris Compton	 	(for part of the Meeting, guest)
	Robert Wolff		(for part of the Meeting, guest)

1. The Term ‘Average Minus’
Consideration was given to the meaning of ‘average minus’ where used in
Law 12C1. Having debated the options, the Committee held that ‘average 
minus’ means the player’s session percentage or 40% whichever is the
lower.

2. Procedure for awarding assigned adjusted scores
There was discussion of the procedure in awarding assigned adjusted
scores following an irregularity. A change was made by the Committee in
the interpretation of the law. Henceforward the law is to be applied so
that advantage gained by an offender (see Law 72B1), provided it is
related to the infraction and not obtained solely by the good play of
the offenders, shall be construed as an advantage in the table score
whether consequent or subsequent to the infraction. Damage to a
non-offending side shall be a consequence of the infraction if redress
is to be given in an adjusted score. The Committee remarked that the
right to redress for a non-offending side is not annulled by a normal
error or misjudgement in the subsequent action but only by an action
that is evidently irrational, wild or gambling (which would include the
type of action commonly referred to as a ‘double shot’)

3. Laws 20F1 and 20F2
In relation to the phrase "a full explanation of the opponents’
auction" in Laws 20F1 and 20F2, it was agreed this refers to an
explanation of the whole auction. However, it is recognised that in
practical play players would frequently ask about the significance of
one particular call; this marginal infringement of the laws should not
normally attract a penalty but players must be aware of the increased
risk of the creation of unauthorised information that it entails and
the relevance of Law 16 to such circumstances.

4. Regulations when Screens are in use.
The Committee noted an aspect of the WBF regulations applying when 
screens are in use. This states that it is acceptable for a player to
delay the return of the tray for the purpose of restoring the tempo of
the transfer of the tray to ‘normal’. It was held this means the normal
tempo of play generally and not the tempo of play at that particular
table nor the (slow) tempo of a prior movement of the tray on the hand
in question. (Players who deliberately retard the return of the board
beyond the acceptable norm may be in breach of Law 73D2 and 73F2 may
apply).

5. Psychic Bids and Plays 
Guidance on psychics issued by the WBF with its Conditions of Contest
was studied. The Committee held that the statement in its first
paragraph represented the law inaccurately.

The Committee draws attention to the manner in which the laws deal with
psychic calls and plays. These are entirely legal so long as they are
not based on a partnership understanding. A so-say "psychic call" (or
play) which is based on a partnership understanding is not properly
called "psychic" - it is a part of the methods of the partnership in
question and subject to the regulations of the sponsoring organisation
authorised by Laws 40D and 40E.

The committee affirms that a psychic call or play which is evidently
identified by the course of the auction or play, as a matter of general
bridge knowledge, is not the subject of an understanding peculiar to
that partnership and is a legitimate ploy. Other than this an
understanding may be created in the partnership by explicit discussion
or by the implicit learning from repeated partnership experience out of
which it may reasonably be thought the partner will recall and be
influenced by earlier occurrences.

The Meeting adjourned to a later date.