[BLML] Absent dummy and consequences
Hans van Staveren
sater at xs4all.nl
Wed Mar 14 18:47:58 CET 2012
Interesting: indeed 7B prohibits defenders from providing this assistance.
However, this is often done, at least where I come from, and as the story
was told to me, declarer was leaning back and actually expecting defenders
to handle the dummy.
If the RHO had pushed the heart five forward one cm and then played the
heart Ace, would it make a difference?
If the dummy was replaced by a wandering TD for the duration of play, as I
often do, and the TD heard the heart 5 and pushed it forward, RHO played AH,
would it make a difference?
From: blml-bounces at rtflb.org [mailto:blml-bounces at rtflb.org] On Behalf Of
Sent: woensdag 14 maart 2012 11:50
To: Bridge Laws Mailing List
Subject: Re: [BLML] Absent dummy and consequences
Whilst leaving the table is permissible...some reasons being more valid than
others, handling another players cards, with certain exceptions for
declarer, is prohited by law (7b3).
I find that latter-day smoking regs are the biggest culprit for absent
A subtil way, IMHO, to handle with this :
RHO as a penalty car, nothing to do with this, RHO score stands,
Dummy is not alowed to leave the table before end of play, just give him a
PP equivalent to the gain between contractX -1 (?) and =,
in teams, it's 2-34 VP's, in pairs, 65-74-83% of a board, just calculate
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Blml