[BLML] a case for Law 11?

Petrus Schuster OSB petrus at stift-kremsmuenster.at
Sat Aug 10 21:15:27 CEST 2013

Am 10.08.2013, 20:44 Uhr, schrieb Sven Pran <svenpran at online.no>:

> Steve Willner
>> On 2013-08-10 1:50 PM, Sven Pran wrote:
>> > Who has drawn attention to the revoke, and how?
>> The original text was:
>> > On the lead of DK, West discards a club and East enquires "having
>> > none?" (which is legal). West then plays a diamond and declarer says
>> > something to the effect of "It's all right, let's just play on."
>> This is at least close enough to drawing attention that I'd rule that  
>> way
> if
>> dummy had called the TD at that instant.  All players were obviously  
>> aware
> that
>> an irregularity had taken place.  That's enough for me.
> [Sven Pran]
> Yes, I agree. I had forgotten this question from East.
> That question alone is sufficient "drawing attention" once West admits  
> the
> revoke.
>> Does anything think dummy should get a PP for calling the TD right away  
>> in
> the
>> circumstances described?
> [Sven Pran]
> No, obviously not.
>> SW> I don't understand what the basis for a split score would be.
>> > The base would be if both sides were considered at fault,
>> Can you give split scores even then if weighted scores are possible?
> [Sven Pran]
> Sure you can.
> Law 12C1f: The scores awarded to the two sides need not balance.
>> Not a bad idea if legal.
>> To make sure I understand... the idea is that the revoke is one
> infraction, and
>> the improper TD call is another, and you might rectify separately for
> those
>> infractions with different weights?  If so, the principle does make  
>> sense.
>> Thanks.  (We agree it isn't needed here.)
> [Sven Pran]
> The rectification for the revoke is covered in Law 64, note that Law 64C  
> (if
> relevant) is the basis for awarding an adjusted score.

64C only kicks in when the NOS is insufficiently compensated, and  
obviously in the context that means the side that has not revoked.
The problem here is that they are, perhaps, over-compensated.

> The improper TD call should IMHO normally result in a PP, not a score
> adjustment.
> (However, a "too late" TD call itself does not justify a PP, it should be
> handled under Law 11.)
> _______________________________________________
> Blml mailing list
> Blml at rtflb.org
> http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml

More information about the Blml mailing list