You get 3 attempts to guess what this sequence of numbers shows:
- No, this is not my new phone number, too many digits for that, and the first one should be a 0 anyway.
- No, I am not about to order food from my favorite Chinese restaurant. They don’t have numbers for their dishes, if you go there, you eat whatever the cook bought fresh on the market that morning. Which is always pretty good.
- And this isn’t the MAC-address of my PC either.
What it is? It is a list of laws that have to do with an insufficient bid as in the auction on the right. 
As you probably have have heard, the laws of duplicate contract bridge have been revised over the last years and the new code went into effect last Friday, September 1. At least in the Netherlands, where the season traditionally starts on September 1, other countries may select a different date, as long as it is sometime before October 1.
That is in the Netherlands where the season tradionally starts on that day, other countries may select a different date, as long as it is before October 1.
Even though we still play bridge with 13 cards and the ♦A will still beat the ♦K, there is one area where a totally new concept has been introduced, the “comparable call”, and that has major consequences.
Side-note: All Dutch TD’s were sent a new law book by the NBB (quite generous of them!) but the accompanying letter said “the new code will not have a major impact on club play”. Sorry guys but that is just wrong. It will, as the way insufficient bids and calls out of turn do come up frequently. I have no problem in making things simple when they can be made simple, that is not a good idea here.
Proof: the first TD call of the new season at my table was an insufficient bid, and the laws mentioned above came into effect. And if you think that you knew the old code and can deal with it, you are wrong. In fact, all 6 laws that deal with the auction on the left have been rewritten. Here we go:
First law 25A (change of unintended call) has been reworded, making it (at least that is the idea) much clearer when a call can be corrected without consequences. For example, a mispull of the 1♦ when the 2♦ was intended. That wasn’t the case here, the player in question admitted that he wasn’t paying attention and had missed the 1NT opening bid.
Law 27 (insufficient bid) then comes into effect. In the old days, one had to check whether 1♦ or 2♦ were conventional, before ruling how the bid could be made sufficient. That changed, the word conventional has gone, instead on has to look at comparable calls and we end up with Law 23.
Law 23 says (in effect): 1♦ shows diamonds, 2♦ would have been (for this pair) a conventional defence against 1NT not showing diamonds, so that is not allowed as a replacement. 3♦ probably would have been a comparable call, as any hand that bids 3♦ now would presumably also open 1♦.
The player in question decided to replace his 1♦ with a pass. As this ended the auction, there were no further consequences for north. But, we now have a withdrawn call (1♦) not replaced by a comparable call, and the new law 26 kicks in: declarer may specify a suit that north may not lead.
And do you think that you are done as a TD? No, after the hand, you still have to apply law 16, to check if NS gained advantage from the whole exercise. North could, for example, use the knowledge that south must hold at least 12 points. Finally, there is law 72C, the old law 23, which basically forbids that NS gain advantage from intentionally making an insufficient bid.
Confused? You probably should be, this is not complicated but it is certainly totally different from what you are used to. If you are a TD, make sure that you take sufficient time to study the new code.
I did a couple of training sessions for TD’s in the area. The material is still available, and I might do another one if there is sufficient interest. The same has happened in other regions and there is more material around.