bridgetalk.com forums :: Laws & Rulings :: Revoke

George

Revoke - twice ( 11:42:48 TueMar 11 2003 )

Hi there.

I was called to a table by declarer who was playing 4S, where a defender has revoked twice.

First revoke: diamond led, defender ruffs in and wins trick.
Second revoke: heart led, defender ruffs in and wins trick.
Result: declarer goes two off.

NB. Defender DID win other tricks between the two revokes, but did not win any tricks subsequent to the second revoke.

The first part of the ruling was simple: one trick transferred for winning revoke trick, another for winning a subsequent trick. Then I may have got it wrong.

My overall ruling was to transfer two tricks to declarer, but having given it some more thought, I think I may have misunderstood law 64 B2. :dunno:

At the time, I assumed that since she had ruffed on both occasions (ie. played the same suit on both revokes) then law 64 B2 meant there was no penalty for the second revoke.

The wording of 64 B2 seems a bit ambiguous but the definition of a revoke as "the play of a card of another suit..." makes me think that it is referring to the suit led.

So in the above scenario, should I have transferred 3 tricks to the non-offending side?

And had the offending side won a further trick, subsequent to her second revoke, would this have merited transferring 4 tricks?

Many thanks

bluejak

427 posts
Forum Host

Reply

Re: Revoke - twice ( 13:20:24 TueMar 11 2003 )

Yes, you have misunderstood Law 64B2, as you suspected. :sad:

When it refers to a revoke "in" a suit it means revoking "in" the suit led.

So you should have given three tricks, or four tricks, dependent on how many tricks were available.

In effect the Law says that if a player revokes on a heart lead, and does so again [and perhaps again!] which does happen when a player has a little heart stuck behind another card, then that is one revoke.

But it is different when two different suits are led. After all, it is no longer possible that the second revoke was because the same single card was invisible. :sheep:

---
David Stevenson <laws2@blakjak.com>
Liverpool, England, UK
http://blakjak.com/lws_menu.htm

JimO

175 posts
Forum Host

Reply

Re: Revoke - twice ( 13:56:06 TueMar 11 2003 )

Country: USA

I believe it should a three trick penalty - 2 tricks for the first revoke (offender won the revoke trick; offending side won subsequent tricks) and 1 trick for the second revoke (offender won revoke trick, but offending side did not win any tricks subsequent to revoke trick).

And, had the offending side won a trick subequent to the second revoke, that would mea a 4-trick penalty.

Also, I am assuming the second revoke occured prior to trick 12. Revokes on trick 12 are not subject to trick penalty, but are corrected.

Of course, if 3 tricks does not restore equity to the non-offenders, then the penaty could be more.

---
-Jim O'Neil
Oak Park, IL

8 bridge player(s) online in the last 15 minutes - 1 bridgetalk member(s), 0 incognito and 7 guest(s).
(The most ever was 52 09:45:43 Fri Feb 14 2003)
bluejak

Total Members: 393, Newest Member: edm.

International Bridge Laws Forum

If you need help with the Laws or rulings from
any country in the world, this is the place!

Hosted by David Stevenson
Senior Consultant Director
English Bridge Union

International Bridge Laws Forum

If you need help with the Laws or rulings from any country in the world, this is the place!Hosted by David StevensonSenior Consultant DirectorEnglish Bridge Union

If you need help with the Laws or rulings from
any country in the world, this is the place!

Hosted by David Stevenson
Senior Consultant Director
English Bridge Union