[BLML] L65D and agreement

Robert Frick rfrick at rfrick.info
Tue Apr 8 19:49:27 CEST 2014

On Tue, 08 Apr 2014 08:59:39 -0400, Eric Landau <ehaa.bridge at verizon.net>  

> On Apr 8, 2014, at 6:40 AM, Robert Frick <rfrick at rfrick.info> wrote:
>> Declarer and dummy said "down 1" and one defender agreed. They folded up
>> their cards. The other defender then said "down 2". (The fourth player's
>> cards looked to be in order but did not seem to be in order when I
>> examined them.)
>> A critical question was if that counted as agreement per L65D  
>> ("Agreement
>> on Results of Play").
> No, the critical question is whether declarer was down one or down two.   
> Only if the TD can't determine that do the legal niceties of what  
> constitutes "agreement" matter.
>> There was no L79A1 infraction, all four hands had not been returned to  
>> the
>> board. Not sure how that would be relevant.
>> And, ironically, while the first defender was agreeing on the results of
>> play, that defender was not agreeing on number of tricks won -- the
>> defender claimed that she was agreeing to 1NT down one, when the  
>> contract
>> was actually 2NT.
>> L79B2 apparently covered the situation -- "The director rules what score
>> is to be recorded". And I consulted with a lawyer/director who said that
>> one person agreeing counts as an agreement.
> Rather than consult with lawyers, I'd have spent my time and effort  
> trying to work out what actually happened at the table.

Video cameras you mean? EW were not good enough to remember the play of  
the hand.

> Eric Landau
> Silver Spring MD
> New York NY
> _______________________________________________
> Blml mailing list
> Blml at rtflb.org
> http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml


More information about the Blml mailing list