|
Thread Index :: FAQ's :: Main Menu :: Posting Hints :: Emoticon Key :: Search David's Lawspage :: EBU :: ACBL :: WBF |
International Bridge Laws ForumIf you need help with the Laws or rulings from |
| To ask a question, click HERE and type in your message. Please specify your country in your query where indicated. Right click your mouse button for help on abbreviations. |
| Welcome, Register :: Log in |
| View Thread Page(s): [ 1 ] |
| [ Get Email Advice of Replies ] | [ Print ] | [ Send ] | [ Watch ] | [ < ] [ Add a Reply ] [ > ] |
|
Guest Reply |
Country: UK
Question 1: I am trying to encourage correct practice in my club by calling the director every time a defender immediately corrects a revoke. It is common practice for players to revoke, mutter an apology and follow suit, leaving the card erroneously played on the table as a "penalty card" (no options for the non-offenders or restrictions on the offenders ever see the light of day). If this happens when I am dummy, can I call the director, or does this count as calling attention to an irregularity? Question 2: The laws allow dummy to keep track of tricks won or lost, but not to interfere with play. Someone asked me last night: If declarer notices a discrepancy between the tricks he has recorded as won and those recorded by dummy, is he allowed to question dummy? I made it clear that dummy may certainly not draw attention to any such discrepancy, nor may he try to help declarer recall any aspects of the preceeding play (e.g. "You lost the third trick when you finessed the spade, remember?") My inclination is to disallow even such neutral questions from declarer to dummy as: "Are you sure you've pointed your cards correctly?" What do you think? James |
|
AlanQ Reply |
Q1 Good luck to you in trying to encourage correct practice. Players do what you describe, I suppose, because they think they know the law and don't want to bother the director (usually because he is playing at another table, but possibly also because they think it looks like making a big issue of the infraction). David will point out, quite correctly, that they don't actually have an option of dealing with the infraction themselves since the laws state that the director must be called.
My own pet hate in this area is when declarer accidentally leads from the wrong hand. What normally happens here is that dummy points this out (which, of course, he is not entitled to) and then declarer leads instead from the right hand without any suggestion that a defender may wish to accept the lead out of turn. In a recent national competition (in England) I followed suit after dummy had pointed out that declarer should not have led from dummy, since I wanted to accept the lead. No doubt I was also at fault for not calling the director before doing this, but I was shocked when a director was called and said that because dummy had already pointed out the lead was from the wrong hand declarer had to lead from his own hand instead and my card became a penalty card! Q2 My suggestion to declarer if he notices a discrepancy woul be to ask the defenders how many tricks each side had taken rather than to ask dummy. |
Ed  172 posts Forum Host Reply |
1. I would say that changing the card played calls attention to the irregularity. That having happened, it is required of all players, including dummy, that they call the director [L9B1(a) and (b)].
2. Nothing in the laws, as far as I can see, prohibits declarer from asking these questions. However, dummy is not permitted to answer [L43A1(c)].  Alan: IMO, your director in that instance was in error.  |
|
WileyKat Reply |
Country: UK
AlanQ - It's my understanding that Dummy is allowed to prevent dealer from committing an irregularity (42B1). That would include indicating which hand the lead was in, refusing to place a card in the played position when that would result in the committing of an irregularity (a revoke or a lead out of turn)... Of course, if declarer has already faced the card from his own hand, then the irregularity has already occurred. Is my understanding correct? |
|
AlanQ Reply |
A recent discussion on this board implied that the permission for dummy to prevent dealer from committing an irregularity allows him to stop declarer naming a card from dummy if, for example, declarer points to dummy and opens his mouth to speak. But a card is legally played from dummy once named, so it's too late to prevent an irregularity once declarer names a card, and dummy should then do nothing to draw attention to the irregularity. |
bluejak  427 posts Forum Host Reply |
No-one, dummy or not, is allowed to point out that another player has a card pointing the wrong way.
|
|
JimO 175 posts Forum Host Reply |
Country: USA
Regarding a trick turned the wrong way: I have answered this in several forums. The ACBL Laws Commission decided in Toronto in 1992 (See the Tech Files) that: Dummy should never point out that another player has a trick turned the wrong way. Defenders should not do so. Decelarer can pretty much say what he likes. If a player who has won the last trick has the trick turned wrong, and likely does not realize he has won the trick, it is acceptable to inform him that it is his lead.
|
|
JimO 175 posts Forum Host Reply |
Country: USA
Please call the Director when there is an irregularity - especially a corrected revoke. (And an insufficient bid, too). Yes, the card becomes a major penalty card - but that's not all, folks. There can be lead penalties. Don't demand a lead penalty after the offender's partner has gained won a trick and led to the next. Players too often make their own rulings, and don't make the complete ruling.
|
|
guest Reply |
Could somone please explain why the laws are framed to forbid players pointing out that cards are pointing the wrong way? I know it's the law but I'm wondering what the law-makers saw as a problem - assuming it is not accompanied by any comment as to why the trick is the wrong way.
|
|
Frances Hinden Reply |
Country: UK
Situation 1: Declarer is in 4S and has lost three tricks. Defender 1 is on lead, but has a card pointed the wrong way and thinks the defence have only taken two tricks. Defender 1 is just about to underlead an ace to try and give declarer a chance to mis-guess and go off, when defender 2 says 'you have a card wrong partner'. Defender 1 cashes the ace. Situation 2: Declarer is in 4S and has lost two tricks. At trick 12 he leads towards an AQ in the dummy. Declarer has a card the wrong way and thinks he has lost three tricks. He is about to take a finesse into the now singleton king and go two off when dummy says 'you have a card wrong partner'. Declarer now puts the ace up to ensure the contract. |
|
James Vickers Reply |
Country: UK
Hi "Guest". The reason for the rule is to prevent illegal communication between partners. For instance, one defender may see that they are in a position to cash out and defeat the contract, but may notice that partner thinks they have taken one trick fewer and is looking for a clever way of winning the setting trick. They may not remind partner of the state of play by drawing attention to the mistake. Likewise declarer must be given a chance to go wrong if they have miscounted the tricks taken, and may not be corrected by dummy. James |
|
bluejak 427 posts Forum Host Reply |
James and Frances have explained excellently what abuse the WBF Laws Commission was trying to control when they changed the Laws to stop players pointing out tricks wrong.
But I do believe the WBFLC got it wrong. While there are the dangers James and Frances mention later in the hand it is difficult to see any possible abuse from a player immediately pointing out when someone has got it wrong. I have written ot the WBFLC suggesting that any player may point out a card is turned the wrong way until both sides have played to the next trick. In my view that will control the abuse but will also deal with the very common situation where someone gets a card wrong and others {not necessarily partner} wish to correct him. I believe this will reduce arguments.
|
|
James Vickers Reply |
Country: UK
The law refers to "quitted tricks", and a trick becomes "quitted" when all four cards have been played and turned face down. I certainly don't take issue with anyone drawing an attention to a wrongly pointed trick the moment the cards have been turned over (although strictly speaking I should), but once play to the next trick has started I enforce the rules. I could also live with David's solution. James |
| View Thread Page(s): [ 1 ] |
| [ Get Email Advice of Replies ] | [ Print ] | [ Send ] | [ Watch ] | [ < ] [ Add a Reply ] [ > ] |
|
6 bridge player(s) online in the last 15 minutes - 1 bridgetalk member(s), 0 incognito and 5 guest(s). (The most ever was 52 09:45:43 Fri Feb 14 2003) bluejak |
|
Total Members: 393, Newest Member: edm. | Register :: Log in The time is now 00:31:57 Wed Aug 27 2003 |
© 2001-2003 BbBoy.net
|
Thread Index :: FAQ's :: Main Menu :: Posting Hints :: Emoticon Key :: Search David's Lawspage :: EBU :: ACBL :: WBF |
Legend :: 
Read Topic :: 
Unread Topic
Read Topic :: Unread Topic
Help | Full Format: ON :: OFF | Text: ON :: OFF | Email Status