Help
https://groups.googl.../m/XM6YK5pz5zoJ
SUMMARY
At T2 defender revokes, pard asks about the failure to follow suit then wins the trick, and shifts establishing the revoke. A one tricker via L64A.
The fascinating part is that the meaning of L64C did not register with the comments. The interesting part being “the Director deems that the non-offending side is insufficiently compensated by this Law for the damage caused.”
Now You Don’t See’em
Many impute words such as ‘had the revoke not occurred’ which could be said to inflict less than insightful rulings on the uninitiated. For instance:
Attention being drawn to a failure to follow suit when able creates a duty to correct the revoke
Now You Do
L62A A player must correct his revoke if attention is drawn to the irregularity before it becomes established.
L62A fashions a duty upon revoker and failure to perform that duty is an infraction. There is an entitlement that the revoke be corrected forthwith. Now consider the consequences of fulfilling that duty:
1. the revoke is corrected whereby the (withdrawn revoke card) becomes a PC
2. exercising the PC option to forbid a D lead for as long as the lead is held puts declarer in the position to win the next trick, pull the last trump, and take 12 tricks (fulfilling the contract)
Thus, by virtue of the revoke inquiry declarer’s equity at the point of the inquiry was 12 tricks. This state of affairs is sufficient for the TD to deem 64A insufficiently compensates declarer. That requires an adjusted score of 12 tricks based upon infracting 62A.
RGB
Your Ruling? (not a UI ruling
)Mar 24, 1997, 2:00:00 AM
to
The following came up in a
sectional stratified Swiss
(7 boards 20 VP scale).
EW are not strong players,
if it matters.
E/all
Ax
x
xxxx
AKT9xx
K9xxx QT8xx
xx ATx
A9x QJx
xxx xx
J
KQJ98xx
KTx
QJ
West North East South
---- ----- ---- -----
- - Pass 1H
Pass 2C Pass 3H
Pass 3NT Pass 4H
Pass 6H All Pass
2C was game forcing
Trick 1: Hx-x-x-8
Trick 2: HK-D9-Sx-A
When west pitched the D9 on the
second heart, east inquired "no
hearts, partner?"
[note this does not establish revoke,
since this is in North America]
West answered "none"
East now shifted to the DQ,
and the defenders took 3 tricks.
West subsequently discovered he had
another small heart, so the
score was adjusted to 11 tricks to NS,
-100.
NS asked for redress, since there
was some chance that east would have
shifted to a spade, to remove a dummy
entry before clubs could be set up.
Also, NS noted there was some chance
west had deliberately refused to correct
his revoke, since making the D9 a penalty
card would have allowed south to forbid a
diamond lead and claim the slam.
[In order to beat the slam, east has to
duck the second heart, allowing partner
to discard the D9 if a 3rd heart is played.
Then he has to not ruff the 3rd round of clubs,
so that he can ruff the 4th round with the HA
as the second diamond goes away from the south
hand, and west sheds the D9. Now he can
shift to a diamond, for down 1]
a) how do you rule as director?
b) how do you rule in committee?
[FWIW, at the other table, EW were -500 in 4Sx]
Please quote any relevant Laws.
This director never opened the Law
book, or read the laws to us.
He initially ruled no damage.
We asked for the appeal form, and
he said "You can't appeal a book
ruling." I told him that this was
in fact not correct, that we could appeal
the ruling, although the committee could
only recommend the director change his ruling.
I said "Fine, I want to appeal anyway."
His response was "I don't care if the committee
gives you +1430, I won't change my ruling."
However, he came back later and said he was
changing his ruling to
75% of time east returns DQ
25% of time east returns S
So we 75% of -600 and 25% of +830,
so losing 5.75 IMP on the board.
Since an appeal could only gain us 3 more VP,
we didn't pursue the matter any further.
c) What do you think of this director's
actions?
curt
http://www.cco.caltech.edu/~hastings
