BBO Discussion Forums: Unestablished revoke continuation - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

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

Unestablished revoke continuation What is your ruling?

#1 User is offline   zenbiddist 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 132
  • Joined: 2013-May-20
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia

Posted 2019-October-01, 20:46

Declarer leads a side suit, and LHO ruffs in (revoking). Dummy plays low, and RHO plays low.
At this point, LHO realises they've revoked, and the director asks them to play a diamond. Dummy is allowed to change their card to a king.

Can RHO play change their card and play an ace?
If so, they would. Now declarer could exercise lead directing rights, and so on.
But is RHO's previously contributed card a penalty card?

Now there is a small UI problem - LHO knows which pip RHO contributed to the revoke, and now they've produced an ace.
How do the laws treat that UI problem?

Thanks
0

#2 User is offline   sfi 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,589
  • Joined: 2009-May-18
  • Location:Oz

Posted 2019-October-01, 21:15

You're looking for law 62C.

Once declarer chooses to change dummy's card, RHO can also change their card. 62C2 tells us that the card originally played is a (major) penalty card. The law directs us to 16C which tells us that the information from the withdrawn play is unauthorised to the defending side. So LHO is not entitled to know what card they were going to play to the trick and the information associated with that trick. LHO is entitled to know that RHO has to play the penalty card at their first legal opportunity though.

If RHO wins the ace, both defenders have a major penalty card. So law 50D2 kicks in. Before RHO leads, declarer gets the normal lead options associated with LHO's penalty card. If their penalty card is compatible with declarer's choice, they must lead that. If not, they lead another card and it remains as a penalty card.
3

#3 User is offline   weejonnie 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 766
  • Joined: 2012-April-11
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North-east England
  • Interests:Bridge Laws, croquet

Posted 2019-October-02, 03:15

Note that the other penalty card (the trump) will be picked up if declarer insists on (or forbids) a specific suit. If he doesn't then RHO has to lead the penalty card and it remains on the table. Whilst the penalty cards are on the table information about them is authorised to the OS as well as the NOS - but if the OS gain from the information then the score is adjusted.

Law 50E draws a fine line - in effect it allows players to make their normal leads etc without having to carefully avoid making use of the information i.e. having to choose a logical alternative if one exists. (73C/16B)
No matter how well you know the laws, there is always something that you'll forget. That is why we have a book.
Get the facts. No matter what people say, get the facts from both sides BEFORE you make a ruling or leave the table.
Remember - just because a TD is called for one possible infraction, it does not mean that there are no others.
In a judgement case - always refer to other TDs and discuss the situation until they agree your decision is correct.
0

#4 User is offline   barmar 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 18,934
  • Joined: 2004-August-21
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2019-October-02, 09:10

View Postsfi, on 2019-October-01, 21:15, said:

You're looking for law 62C.

Once declarer chooses to change dummy's card, RHO can also change their card. 62C2 tells us that the card originally played is a (major) penalty card. The law directs us to 16C which tells us that the information from the withdrawn play is unauthorised to the defending side. So LHO is not entitled to know what card they were going to play to the trick and the information associated with that trick. LHO is entitled to know that RHO has to play the penalty card at their first legal opportunity though.

Have you gotten LHO and RHO mixed up? LHO is the one who revoked and now has a penalty card. RHO legally withdrew their card when declarer changed dummy's card. their original card is UI to LHO, but not a penalty card.

#5 User is offline   sfi 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,589
  • Joined: 2009-May-18
  • Location:Oz

Posted 2019-October-02, 09:13

View Postbarmar, on 2019-October-02, 09:10, said:

Have you gotten LHO and RHO mixed up? LHO is the one who revoked and now has a penalty card. RHO legally withdrew their card when declarer changed dummy's card. their original card is UI to LHO, but not a penalty card.


Law 62C2 is as follows. Note the phrase in bold.

Quote

2. After a non-offender so withdraws a card, the player of the offending side next in rotation may withdraw his played card, which becomes a penalty card if the player is a defender (see Law 16C).

0

#6 User is offline   pran 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 5,056
  • Joined: 2009-September-14
  • Location:Ski, Norway

Posted 2019-October-02, 09:18

View Postbarmar, on 2019-October-02, 09:10, said:

Have you gotten LHO and RHO mixed up? LHO is the one who revoked and now has a penalty card. RHO legally withdrew their card when declarer changed dummy's card. their original card is UI to LHO, but not a penalty card.

HUH?
The card withdrawn by RHO under Law 62C2 also becomes a major penalty card. Read carefully and understand Law 62C2 !
0

#7 User is offline   axman 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 700
  • Joined: 2009-July-29
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2019-October-02, 10:54

View Postzenbiddist, on 2019-October-01, 20:46, said:

Declarer leads a side suit, and LHO ruffs in (revoking). Dummy plays low, and RHO plays low.
At this point, LHO realises they've revoked, and the director asks them to play a diamond. Dummy is allowed to change their card to a king.

Can RHO play change their card and play an ace?
If so, they would. Now declarer could exercise lead directing rights, and so on.
But is RHO's previously contributed card a penalty card?

Now there is a small UI problem - LHO knows which pip RHO contributed to the revoke, and now they've produced an ace.
How do the laws treat that UI problem?

Thanks


You have noticed a defect in the revoke correction procedure. Namely, offender can learn of cards before his correction (the Alcatraz Coup condition). It does not seem cricket that the offending side can get two extra turns rather than suffer the effects of L57A.
0

#8 User is offline   pran 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 5,056
  • Joined: 2009-September-14
  • Location:Ski, Norway

Posted 2019-October-02, 13:19

View Postaxman, on 2019-October-02, 10:54, said:

You have noticed a defect in the revoke correction procedure. Namely, offender can learn of cards before his correction (the Alcatraz Coup condition). It does not seem cricket that the offending side can get two extra turns rather than suffer the effects of L57A.

I have a problem seeing how this illustrates any defect in the revoke correcting procedure.

If you refer to zenbiddist's remark and question:

Can RHO play change their card and play an ace?
If so, they would. Now declarer could exercise lead directing rights, and so on.
But is RHO's previously contributed card a penalty card?

then the answer is that RHO may certainly change his card if Declarer first changes the card he has played from Dummy.
But the card RHO thus retracts in order to change his play does indeed become a major penalty card.

I don't see how the revoking side can end up with any advantage from this compared to the situation had LHO not revoked in the first place?
0

#9 User is offline   barmar 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 18,934
  • Joined: 2004-August-21
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2019-October-02, 14:04

View Postpran, on 2019-October-02, 13:19, said:

I don't see how the revoking side can end up with any advantage from this compared to the situation had LHO not revoked in the first place?

And if they do somehow get an advantage, and the TD judges that the revoker "could well have known" this would happen, the score can be adjusted.

#10 User is offline   sanst 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 557
  • Joined: 2014-July-30
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Deventer, The Netherlands

Posted 2019-October-02, 14:31

View Postpran, on 2019-October-02, 09:18, said:

HUH?
The card withdrawn by RHO under Law 62C2 also becomes a major penalty card. Read carefully and understand Law 62C2 !

Donít be so pedantic. We all make mistakes.
Joost
1

#11 User is offline   barmar 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 18,934
  • Joined: 2004-August-21
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2019-October-02, 14:35

View Postsanst, on 2019-October-02, 14:31, said:

Donít be so pedantic. We all make mistakes.

Thank you. Indeed, I didn't bother to read the relevant Law, my memory about the withdrawn card was faulty.

Were I actually directing, I would of course read the Law and follow it step by step.

#12 User is offline   pescetom 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,421
  • Joined: 2014-February-18
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Italy

Posted 2019-October-02, 15:00

View Postbarmar, on 2019-October-02, 14:35, said:

Were I actually directing, I would of course read the Law and follow it step by step.


Would you really? I would read the Law if I was in real doubt, but not just to be sure I was right. Players take note of these things, especially if they know the TD is inexperienced as I am.
0

#13 User is offline   blackshoe 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 16,726
  • Joined: 2006-April-17
  • Location:Rochester, NY

Posted 2019-October-03, 00:28

If you are absolutely sure that your memory of the law is complete and correct, you're probably wrong.
--------------------
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
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
0

#14 User is offline   pran 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 5,056
  • Joined: 2009-September-14
  • Location:Ski, Norway

Posted 2019-October-03, 01:44

View Postblackshoe, on 2019-October-03, 00:28, said:

If you are absolutely sure that your memory of the law is complete and correct, you're probably wrong.

After 40 years as active director I consider myself having a fair knowledge of the laws.
But there are still situations (in particular Laws 29-32 call out of rotation) where I never rule without consulting my law book in each individual case B-)
0

#15 User is offline   Vampyr 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 9,668
  • Joined: 2009-September-15
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:London

Posted 2019-October-03, 08:27

View Postpran, on 2019-October-03, 01:44, said:

After 40 years as active director I consider myself having a fair knowledge of the laws.
But there are still situations (in particular Laws 29-32 call out of rotation) where I never rule without consulting my law book in each individual case B-)


It looks more professional and reassures players that you have got it right. They donít know how long you have been directing or how well you know the laws.
I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones -- Albert Einstein
1

#16 User is offline   axman 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 700
  • Joined: 2009-July-29
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2019-October-03, 11:40

View Postpran, on 2019-October-02, 13:19, said:

I have a problem seeing how this illustrates any defect in the revoke correcting procedure.

If you refer to zenbiddist's remark and question:

Can RHO play change their card and play an ace?
If so, they would. Now declarer could exercise lead directing rights, and so on.
But is RHO's previously contributed card a penalty card?

then the answer is that RHO may certainly change his card if Declarer first changes the card he has played from Dummy.
But the card RHO thus retracts in order to change his play does indeed become a major penalty card.

I don't see how the revoking side can end up with any advantage from this compared to the situation had LHO not revoked in the first place?


As the law sits, this situation creates two extra turns for the OS (the 'OOT' correction by revoker and an 'OOT' change of play by revoker's partner) where revoker thus gains such information as well as the card of the NOS before choosing his revoke correction.

The appropriate remedy is to prevent where practical the OS from gaining such turns. And to some extent it is practical: a. the NOS can affect revoker's correction thereby eliminating the gain of that extra turn and b. by making revoker's partner original card stand as played to eliminate revoker's partner from that extra turn

This approach removes Thought Crime from the menu and avoids presenting an ethics problem to revoker's correction.
0

#17 User is offline   pran 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 5,056
  • Joined: 2009-September-14
  • Location:Ski, Norway

Posted 2019-October-03, 13:14

View Postaxman, on 2019-October-03, 11:40, said:

As the law sits, this situation creates two extra turns for the OS (the 'OOT' correction by revoker and an 'OOT' change of play by revoker's partner) where revoker thus gains such information as well as the card of the NOS before choosing his revoke correction.

The appropriate remedy is to prevent where practical the OS from gaining such turns. And to some extent it is practical: a. the NOS can affect revoker's correction thereby eliminating the gain of that extra turn and b. by making revoker's partner original card stand as played to eliminate revoker's partner from that extra turn

This approach removes Thought Crime from the menu and avoids presenting an ethics problem to revoker's correction.

Sorry - I cannot follow your logic.

First of all, what do you mean by 'OOT' ?

Second: Instead of just stating a theory I should appreciate an example clearly showing the problem.
0

#18 User is offline   pescetom 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,421
  • Joined: 2014-February-18
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Italy

Posted 2019-October-03, 13:28

View PostVampyr, on 2019-October-03, 08:27, said:

It looks more professional and reassures players that you have got it right. They donít know how long you have been directing or how well you know the laws.


I guess this is another cultural difference. In the eyes of my players, seeing that I have to read the book is no guarantee that I am going to get things right - if anything the contrary.
0

#19 User is offline   Vampyr 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 9,668
  • Joined: 2009-September-15
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:London

Posted 2019-October-03, 19:19

View Postpescetom, on 2019-October-03, 13:28, said:

I guess this is another cultural difference. In the eyes of my players, seeing that I have to read the book is no guarantee that I am going to get things right - if anything the contrary.


They trust your memory more than the original source? Bizarre.

The first question asked on the first day of my County Directors course was “how do you make book rulings?” My hand shot up because I knew the answer “with the book”.
I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones -- Albert Einstein
0

#20 User is offline   blackshoe 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 16,726
  • Joined: 2006-April-17
  • Location:Rochester, NY

Posted 2019-October-03, 19:23

First time I was called to make a ruling (on a LOOT) I pulled out the book. Declarer said "we don't have time for that". :(
--------------------
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
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
0

Share this topic:


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

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users