Score adjustment depends on damage — you adjust the score if there was damage, you don't if there wasn't. A PP depends on whether there was an infraction — and in this case the laws use the term "may not" in regard to what calls the recipient of UI is prohibited from choosing. This means that a PP should be issued "more often than not", even if there was no damage.
It is not the case that in ruling on use of UI "no damage" is the same as "no infraction".
A Director Ruling / Appeal
#41
Posted 2008-April-09, 06:31
--------------------
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
Our ultimate goal on defense is to know by trick two or three everyone's hand at the table. -- Mike777
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
Our ultimate goal on defense is to know by trick two or three everyone's hand at the table. -- Mike777
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
#42
Posted 2008-April-10, 09:46
Poky, the slow 4D call raised the percentage that the grand was on from 0% to non-0%. Give that auction to 100 bridge players (well, those that play Gerber) without the hesitation - NONE of them would bid 7; they're off a cashing ace.
The only reason to even think about 7 is the hesitation.
I have just demonstrated that the UI from the hesitation suggests bidding 7 over not. Next case.
The only reason to even think about 7 is the hesitation.
I have just demonstrated that the UI from the hesitation suggests bidding 7 over not. Next case.
Long live the Republic-k. -- Major General J. Golding Frederick (tSCoSI)
#43
Posted 2008-April-15, 12:28
If the director can get this one wrong, maybe he shouldn't be directing important events?
#44
Posted 2008-April-15, 13:13
Disturbing story, you would think this is as clear as it can get.
Please note: I am interested in boring, bog standard, 2/1.
- hrothgar
- hrothgar
#45
Posted 2008-April-17, 12:57
This should be a non-brainer for a competent TD - it's not difficult at all. He still got it completely wrong.
It's really surprising that an experienced player wouldn't know (or care?) to do the correct thing here. I'd be very hard on south as a TD and on both south and the TD as an AC.
It's really surprising that an experienced player wouldn't know (or care?) to do the correct thing here. I'd be very hard on south as a TD and on both south and the TD as an AC.
Kind regards,
Harald
Harald
#46
Posted 2008-April-17, 14:21
The appealing comitee should apply some penalty to N/S for playing this conventions.
Now seriously Adam. Its obvious N/S don't know how to answer this G€¬~·$%, why do you state it so clearly that 4♦ is no aces?
Now seriously Adam. Its obvious N/S don't know how to answer this G€¬~·$%, why do you state it so clearly that 4♦ is no aces?

Help
