barmar, on Jul 20 2010, 03:59 AM, said:
What about the law that says that South takes inference from East's BIT at his own risk?
This is why there should be split scores, or at least a PP to EW. East shouldn't be allowed to profit from his hesitation, but South took a risk by assuming East had his tank.
If LHO thinks for a long time as dealer and passes, and I assume he has 11 or 12 HCP for a borderline opening, and take a two-way finesse the wrong way, I get no redress if he had seven spades, was wondering whether to pre-empt, but decided it was too dangerous with the actual hand. If he hesitates, he has a reason, I reach the wrong conclusion, tough luck.
But that does not mean I do not get redress if his hesitation was illegal. In fact, Law 73F tells us to adjust.
A split score? Why? You split the scores when the Laws tell you to split the scores. So you split the scores when you give a ruling in a Law 12C1E jurisdiction when the two standards in Law 12C1E reach different adjustments, you split the score in any jurisdiction when Law 12C1B tells you to, ie if there is a SEWoG, and you split the score when a board is cancelled and Law 12C2 tells to issue unbalanced artificial scores. Any cases I have missed?
So, in this case, you decide whether the hesitation breached the Law. If so, you adjust under Law 73F if there was damage. And when you adjust you use Law 12C1B or 12C1E as part of your adjustment and split the score if those Laws tell you to.
<mutter> Please
pretty please
can we remember this for next time? The question is asked every time we get a Law 73F case.
Since this was Denmark, Law 12C1E does not apply, so you split the score if the non-offender's actions were SEWoG.
jdonn, on Jul 20 2010, 05:31 AM, said:
dburn, on Jul 19 2010, 11:08 PM, said:
you will incur only a procedural penalty instead of the rather larger penalty you would have incurred had you not chea... er, had you not failed to fulfil your obligations under the Laws.
Are there limits on procedural penalties? If so, why? As a director I would gladly give this east a procedural penalty larger than the largest possible score obtainable on a board.
There are no legal limits, but why should you? If you consider his actions have gained him illegally, you adjust, not give a PP. That is what adjustments are for.
So the only
legal thing wrong with such a PP is that you are not following other Laws: you believe there is an infraction, you believe there was damage, and you are not prepared to follow the correct Law [73F]. That's illegal.