BBO Discussion Forums: Is this legal? - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Is this legal?

#21 User is offline   1eyedjack 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,575
  • Joined: 2004-March-12
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

Posted 2004-July-15, 00:43

mikestar, on Jul 14 2004, 06:53 PM, said:

The director misruled in this case--the correct penalty is the one trick penalty

Ah, I wonder if I misread the original post. Perhaps he was bemoaning the one-trick penalty, in which case my sympathy dissipates. I shall re-check when I have time.
Psych (pron. saik): A gross and deliberate misstatement of honour strength and/or suit length. Expressly permitted under Law 73E but forbidden contrary to that law by Acol club tourneys.

Psyche (pron. sahy-kee): The human soul, spirit or mind (derived, personification thereof, beloved of Eros, Greek myth).
Masterminding (pron. mPosted ImagesPosted ImagetPosted Imager-mPosted ImagendPosted Imageing) tr. v. - Any bid made by bridge player with which partner disagrees.

"Gentlemen, when the barrage lifts." 9th battalion, King's own Yorkshire light infantry,
2000 years earlier: "morituri te salutant"

"I will be with you, whatever". Blair to Bush, precursor to invasion of Iraq
0

#22 User is offline   mikestar 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 913
  • Joined: 2003-August-18
  • Location:California, USA

Posted 2004-July-15, 08:52

Under current laws Bridge has the mildest revoke penalty in the world of trick taking games. For comparison:

Bridge pre 1975: 2 tricks
Whist: 3 tricks, can include pre-revoke tricks.
Pinochle: by bidder--loses bid even if already made.
by defender--bid makes even if already defeated, revoker pays entire loss for defensive side.
Hearts: revoker takes all 26 points for the deal.
Many games: forfeit of entire game.
0

#23 User is offline   epeeist 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 197
  • Joined: 2004-July-14

Posted 2004-July-16, 14:36

In some of Victor Mollo's "Menagerie" books, the distinction (at least as at the time of writing, I assume this is still the case) between the laws of rubber bridge and of tournament bridge with respect to revokes is made.

In tournament bridge, as many have pointed out, the director can remedy an unfair result (e.g. if revoker benefits from revoke, even with transfer of tricks, the director can adjust the result).

In rubber bridge, unless the laws have been changed, the only penalty is the transfer of tricks (this might have been the basis of the story a previous poster mentioned, about the elderly bridge player who was expecting a lesser penalty). So the only real remedy is not to play with people whose behaviour offends you. And don't play for money unless you've agreed what to do in case of revokes... :rolleyes:
0

#24 User is offline   mikestar 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 913
  • Joined: 2003-August-18
  • Location:California, USA

Posted 2004-July-17, 10:44

Under the current Rubber Bridge laws, the is no such thing as an adjusted score (except in the special laws or club games, which provide for an Arbiter with similar powers to a TD).

However, the revoke law states that the offending side is ethically required to transfer additonal tricks when needed to restore equity, The example given has declarer making 3N if the diamonds split 3-3 (which they do) but a defender revokes in diamonds, leaving declarer down 2 even after the penalty. The revoking side is required to transfer two addittional tricks so that 3N makes.
0

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

2 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users