[VixTD]

The first part perhaps belongs in "simple rulings", but there may be some judgement to be applied later, so I'm posting it here. The hand is from the Midlands Counties Congress Swiss Pairs 2018:

---

In drawing his cards from the board, North dropped ♥K face up on the table.

How do you rule?

[pran]

VixTD, on 2018-January-11, 12:09, said:

The first part perhaps belongs in "simple rulings", but there may be some judgement to be applied later, so I'm posting it here. The hand is from the Midlands Counties Congress Swiss Pairs 2018:

---

In drawing his cards from the board, North dropped ♥K face up on the table.

How do you rule?

Law 16D said:

Extraneous Information from Other Sources
1. When a player accidentally receives extraneous information about a board he is playing or has yet to play, as by [...] seeing a card belonging to another player at his own table before the auction begins (see also Law 13A), the Director should be notified forthwith, preferably by the recipient of the information.
[...]

(The remainder of Law 16D specifies the procedure to be followed by the Director.)

[sanst]

Is dropping a card due to a player’s own error? If so, Law 24 applies, in this case 24B, a single card of honour rank, and partner must pass next time. The information from the card is UI to partner and AI to the opponents. And Law 72 might play a role. So, what's the catch?

[sfi]

sanst, on 2018-January-11, 16:35, said:

Is dropping a card due to a player’s own error? If so, Law 24 applies, in this case 24B, a single card of honour rank, and partner must pass next time. The information from the card is UI to partner and AI to the opponents. And Law 72 might play a role. So, what's the catch?

The auction hasn't started yet though, so Law 24 is not applicable. The auction period has, but that's a different thing.

Basically, the ruling is "pick it up, South has UI, and I'll look at the board afterwards to see if there is any issue."

[sanst]

sfi, on 2018-January-11, 16:54, said:

The auction hasn't started yet though, so Law 24 is not applicable. The auction period has, but that's a different thing.

Basically, the ruling is "pick it up, South has UI, and I'll look at the board afterwards to see if there is any issue."

Sorry, my mistake. Simple rulings are seemingly not that simple.

[pran]

sanst, on 2018-January-12, 02:03, said:

Sorry, my mistake. Simple rulings are seemingly not that simple.

I'd say you are excused - Law 24 was changed from "during the auction period" to "during the auction" with the 2017 laws.
(I did indeed overlook this change myself at first)

[sfi]

sanst, on 2018-January-12, 02:03, said:

Sorry, my mistake. Simple rulings are seemingly not that simple.

I can't really take credit for having known it. One of our national directors quizzed me on it in November and then it came up in a national event a week later (although it was the club king at the table). It's a bit hard to forget after that.

[VixTD]

Sfi got it right, and I have to confess I didn't at the table. I searched the law book for "card exposed during the auction period", didn't find it, ruled under law 24B with a feeling of unease, raced upstairs to find the chief TD, who couldn't find it either. Eventually I found a clause in the White Book telling me to rule under law 16D1.

I didn't think of applying that law initially, as a player's dropped card does not strike me as "extraneous information", it arises from their own clumsiness. Anyway, now to admit to director's error:

North had opened 3NT (having been told that South would have to pass at their first turn) and played there, making eleven tricks.

What should I do now?

[pran]

VixTD, on 2018-January-12, 07:40, said:

Sfi got it right, and I have to confess I didn't at the table. I searched the law book for "card exposed during the auction period", didn't find it, ruled under law 24B with a feeling of unease, raced upstairs to find the chief TD, who couldn't find it either. Eventually I found a clause in the White Book telling me to rule under law 16D1.

I didn't think of applying that law initially, as a player's dropped card does not strike me as "extraneous information", it arises from their own clumsiness. Anyway, now to admit to director's error:

North had opened 3NT (having been told that South would have to pass at their first turn) and played there, making eleven tricks.

What should I do now?

Law 16D continues:

Law 16D2 said:

2. If the Director considers that the information would likely interfere with normal play he may, before any call has been made:
(a) adjust the players’ positions at the table, if the type of contest and scoring permit, so that the player with information about one hand will hold that hand;
(b) if the form of competition allows of it order the board redealt for those contestants;
© allow completion of the play of the board standing ready to award an adjusted score if he judges that the extraneous information affected the result;
(d) award an adjusted score (for team play see Law 86B).

If no player had seen any card of the board (except the exposed card) the Director should simply have ordered each of the four players to exchange his position with his partner for that board, and let play continue (Law 16D2{a}).

At end of play (and as it was now) the Director must apply Law 16D2{c} or Law 16D2{d} and judge if the extraneous information has affected the result.

It appears to me that in a "normal" auction North would either open with a NT bid or rebid NT at his next turn to call, and I find it most likely that North will end up declaring 3NT (unless East or West throws in a call other than PASS during the auction).

So with the information given I would tend to let the table result stand.

[barmar]

VixTD, on 2018-January-12, 07:40, said:

I didn't think of applying that law initially, as a player's dropped card does not strike me as "extraneous information", it arises from their own clumsiness.

What in 16D1 suggests that clumsiness prevents it from being extraneous? It refers to seeing another player's cards, it doesn't mention any restriction on how that happened.

[VixTD]

barmar, on 2018-January-12, 10:03, said:

What in 16D1 suggests that clumsiness prevents it from being extraneous? It refers to seeing another player's cards, it doesn't mention any restriction on how that happened.

Yes, OK, it may still be extraneous, but it comes from partner, not from "other sources", so law 16B would seem more fitting than law 16D.

[gordontd]

VixTD, on 2018-January-12, 12:22, said:

Yes, OK, it may still be extraneous, but it comes from partner, not from "other sources", so law 16B would seem more fitting than law 16D.

16D1 explicitly covers the situation under discussion: "by seeing a card belonging to another player at his own table before the auction begins".

[blackshoe]

pran, on 2018-January-12, 09:55, said:

If no player had seen any card of the board (except the exposed card) the Director should simply have ordered each of the four players to exchange his position with his partner for that board, and let play continue (Law 16D2{a}).

I must be missing something. How does this solve anything? All four players saw the ♥K. It seems to me swapping seats doesn't make any difference. Everyone knows where it is.

[pran]

blackshoe, on 2018-January-12, 15:12, said:

I must be missing something. How does this solve anything? All four players saw the ♥K. It seems to me swapping seats doesn't make any difference. Everyone knows where it is.

Indeed - sorry

[weejonnie]

VixTD, on 2018-January-12, 07:40, said:

Sfi got it right, and I have to confess I didn't at the table. I searched the law book for "card exposed during the auction period", didn't find it, ruled under law 24B with a feeling of unease, raced upstairs to find the chief TD, who couldn't find it either. Eventually I found a clause in the White Book telling me to rule under law 16D1.

I didn't think of applying that law initially, as a player's dropped card does not strike me as "extraneous information", it arises from their own clumsiness. Anyway, now to admit to director's error:

North had opened 3NT (having been told that South would have to pass at their first turn) and played there, making eleven tricks.

What should I do now?

I had the same problem. When I found the solution I added a note in my lawbook in law 24 to look at 16D. Would certainly be useful for the WBF to add it in officially.

[nige1]

Frequently, directors fail to cite the set of laws appropriate to a BBO forum ruling.
The WBF should abandon the TFLB monkey-puzzle tree structure and reformat the laws as a flow-chart or decision-tree.
A side-benefit would be that, in order to accomplish this, the WBFLC, themselves, would need a clear understanding of the ramifications of the laws.

[BudH]

sfi, on 2018-January-11, 16:54, said:

The auction hasn't started yet though, so Law 24 is not applicable. The auction period has, but that's a different thing.

Basically, the ruling is "pick it up, South has UI, and I'll look at the board afterwards to see if there is any issue."

Not really "pick it up". It stays on the table during the auction, later returned to declarer's hand, becomes part of dummy when faced, or becomes a major penalty card (because the card is an honor).

[gordontd]

BudH, on 2018-January-13, 16:20, said:

Not really "pick it up". It stays on the table during the auction, later returned to declarer's hand, becomes part of dummy when faced, or becomes a major penalty card (because the card is an honor).

I think you’ve missed that the auction hasn’t started yet.

[BudH]

gordontd, on 2018-January-13, 17:15, said:

I think you’ve missed that the auction hasn’t started yet.

Gordon, you’re correct. Not only is forcing an offender’s partner to pass once in Law 24 and applicable only after the first call, but penalty cards only occur under Law 24 and not under Law 16D.

[VixTD]

gordontd, on 2018-January-12, 12:37, said:

16D1 explicitly covers the situation under discussion: "by seeing a card belonging to another player at his own table before the auction begins".

Yes, but it just doesn't seem to tie in with the rest of the laws. I'm used to using law 16D1 when a player receives information through no fault of their own side. When the information arises from the offending side's action I expect it to be treated as unauthorized information and possibly for other penalties or restrictions to be applied. I don't see why it should be any different just because the auction hasn't yet started. Like a few others contributing to this topic, I'll know better next time.