[Mbodell]

I want to double check what proper procedure is on when to call TD in acbl events.

Defending against a 4♠ trump contract on trick 4 the declarer doesn't follow suit in ♣ and trumps, and then on trick 7 when I again lead ♣ to tap the declarer my partner overruffs but I now know someone hasn't followed suit (or my count is wrong). I ask my partner "no clubs partner" on trick 7 and she says "no clubs". Even though I know (suspect) that there has been a revoke (and suspect my partner) I shouldn't call TD right now, right?

On trick 10 my partner discards the Q♣ on declarers running of a suit. Is this the place I should call the TD on the revoke?

Very quickly there after the deal is over with declarer making 4♠ right on. At this point I did manage to call the director just before people picked up the tricks and the contract was adjusted 4♠+2, but was I later than I should be on my call?

Would the point to call the TD change if I were declarer (who knows presumably any time past trick 10) or dummy (who I assume shouldn't say anything until the hand is done)?

As an aside with respect to the "no X partner?" is that a legal thing to say as dummy and/or defender in the play of the cards in ACBL events, and if one does is it the sort of thing one should always do. I find I do it only some of the time right now which may give off UI since I do it always when surprised (and only sometimes when not) by the lack of cards in partners hand.

[ralph23]

Mbodell, on Sep 11 2007, 06:17 PM, said:

I want to double check what proper procedure is on when to call TD in acbl events.

Defending against a 4♠ trump contract on trick 4 the declarer doesn't follow suit in ♣ and trumps, and then on trick 7 when I again lead ♣ to tap the declarer my partner overruffs but I now know someone hasn't followed suit (or my count is wrong). I ask my partner "no clubs partner" on trick 7 and she says "no clubs". Even though I know (suspect) that there has been a revoke (and suspect my partner) I shouldn't call TD right now, right?

I would call the Director immediately when my partner failed to follow suit and didn't confess to revoking when I asked "No clubs?"

Director: "Yes"
Me: "I led a club and neither of these two followed suit. The ♣Queen has not been played yet, so one of them has her. Someone has revoked."

It won't be an established revoke since I've caught it before any further cards were played by our side.

[blackshoe]

You are entitled, after partner's response to your query at trick seven, to believe declarer has revoked, so you should call the TD then.

The proper time for declarer to have called was when (at trick ten or later) he realized your partner had revoked. Dummy can also call the director after the revoke becomes known - but not until after the play.

Regarding questions about possible revokes:

[QUOTE=Law 61B]Declarer may ask a defender who has failed to follow suit whether he has a card of the suit led (but a claim of revoke does not automatically warrant inspection of quitted tricks - see Law 66C). Dummy may ask declarer (but see Law 43B2{b}). Defenders may ask declarer but, unless the zonal organization so authorizes, not one another.
NOTE: The ACBL Board of Directors under the authority granted in the revised Law61B, has ruled that in ACBL sanctioned events, a defender may inquire of his partner whether he has a card of the suit led.[/QUOTE]

For completeness:

[quote name='Law 66C][After a card is led to the next trick]' date=' until play ceases, quitted tricks may not be inspected (except at the Director's specific instruction; for example, to verify a claim of a revoke),[QUOTE']

and

[QUOTE=Law 43B2]If dummy, after violation of the limitations listed in A2 preceding:
{a} Warns Declarer on Lead
warns declarer not to lead from the wrong hand, (penalty) either defender may choose the hand from which declarer shall lead.
{b} Asks Declarer about Possible Irregularity
is the first to ask declarer if a play from declarer's hand constitutes a revoke, declarer must substitute a correct card if his play was illegal, and the penalty provisions of Law 64 apply as if the revoke had been established,[/QUOTE]

and finally,

[QUOTE=Law 43A2]Limitations Carrying Specific Penalty
{a} Exchanging Hands
Dummy may not exchange hands with declarer.
{b} Leave Seat to Watch Declarer
Dummy may not leave his seat to watch declarer's play of the hand.
{c} Look at Defender's Hand
Dummy may not, on his own initiative, look at the face of a card in either defender's hand.[/QUOTE]

I dunno why this damnfool software won't let me quote properly.

[ralph23]

blackshoe, on Sep 11 2007, 06:52 PM, said:

You are entitled, after partner's response to your query at trick seven, to believe declarer has revoked, so you should call the TD then.

You know for an actual fact that someone has revoked when the Queen hasn't appeared. It doesn't matter who. You can call upon any irregularity, regardless of who is the guilty party.

BTW, you are also entitled to ask declarer if he is out of clubs. There's no point in this however, as if declarer is the revoker, it's already established and too late to do anything corrective about it.

[blackshoe]

Quote

You can call upon any irregularity, regardless of who is the guilty party.

You can call the director any time you please. Doesn't mean you should.

Law 73B says

Quote

There is no obligation to draw attention to an inadvertent infraction of Law committed by one's own side (but see footnote to Law 75 for a mistaken explanation).

If no one calls attention to your side's irregularity, you have no obligation to call the TD, either (save for a mistaken explanation).

Knowing who revoked may affect your defense, even after the revoke has been established.

[barmar]

blackshoe, on Sep 11 2007, 06:13 PM, said:

You can call the director any time you please. Doesn't mean you should.

In the case of a revoke, if you think it's partner, I believe it's to your benefit to call immediately, as penalties are less severe if the revoke doesn't become established. If you think it's the opponent, you should probably wait until it's established.

In this particular example, calling immediately takes care of both cases. If declarer has revoked it was on the earlier trick, so it's already established, but if partner has revoked you can catch it before it becomes established.