pran, on 2013-May-26, 14:18, said:
Your Logic is apparently based on the assumption that West would still have forgotten the agreement (1) and still misbid (2) had he not given misinformation (3).
No, my logic is based on the
fact that West did forget the agreement and did misbid. Those are West's actions and there is no reason at all to change those actions
because they are not caused by an irregularity. (West gave MI because he forgot the agreement. West didnot forget the agreement because he gave MI.)
West's pass was not caused by an irregularity, therefore it stays. The 3
♥ bid by North was caused by the MI. So, the 3
♥ bid can be changed when an AS is assigned.
pran, on 2013-May-26, 14:18, said:
My Logic is based on the assumption that had the irregularity (3) not occurred it is because West would have remembered the agreement (1) and therefore (probably) not misbid (2).
You cannot reverse causation. The irregularity didnot cause West to forget the agreement. West forgetting the agreement (no irregularity) caused the MI (irregularity).
You are under the misconception that an AS needs to be based on removing
the cause for the irregularity (i.e. removing the forgetting). But an AS is based on removing the irregularity
itself (the MI), not the cause. So, West keeps forgetting the agreement, but through some
Deus ex machina (in plain English: "Act of the TD") NS do not suffer from the irregularity.
Rik
I want my opponents to leave my table with a smile on their face and without matchpoints on their score card - in that order.
The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds the new discoveries, is not “Eureka!” (I found it!), but “That’s funny…” – Isaac Asimov
The only reason God did not put "Thou shalt mind thine own business" in the Ten Commandments was that He thought that it was too obvious to need stating. - Kenberg