|
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 ] [ > ] |
|
[] Reply |
Hello
1) S opens 1C, N 1H , S 1NTWest pass , and now, simultaneously, S says Sorry and puts 1 S in place of 1NT, and North puts 2H N says Oh I have not noticed you said 1S and West askx what is going on and calls Director South asked, claims that he never intended 1NT in effect he has 5 C and 5 S ( if he had only 4 S, does your ruliong change ? ) 2) Does the 2 bids mad simultaneouslyt ( 1S and 2H) indicate that the illegal one is made after the legal one, and in that case has S made a bid out of turn ? Many thanks AL. OHANA |
Ed  172 posts Forum Host Reply |
Gah. What a mess.
 Law 25A says "Until his partner makes a call, a player may substitute his intended call for an inadvertent call but only if he does so, or attempts to do so, without pause for thought. If legal, his last call stands without penalty; if illegal, it is subject to the applicable Law." Ordinarily, this would be simple. It looks to me like this law applies, so S would be allowed to change his call, if the change is before his partner called. But it's not - it's simultaneous with his partner's call. So we look further into the law, and we find law 33: "A call made simultaneously with one made by the player whose turn it was to call is deemed to be a subsequent call." So S, who has made a call simultaneously with his partner's legal call, has called out of turn, and his call is, on top of that, insufficient. Law 27C says an insufficient bid out of rotation is dealt with by law 31. Law 31 refers us, in the beginning to law 29, which says that offender's LHO (in this case, West) may elect to call, thus condoning South's call. No penalty, auction continues. If West does not so elect, South's call is cancelled, auction reverts to East. Now we're back in Law 31... If East passes, South must repeat his call, which is insufficient, so now we go back to that law (Law 27) and West has the option to accept the insufficient bid, or not. If he accepts it, the auction continues and there is no penalty. If he does not, then South must substitute either a sufficient bid, or a pass. If he bids 2S, no problem, auction continues (although if the TD decides the IB "conveyed such information as to damage the NOS he may adjust the score" (Law 27B1(b))). If he bids anything else, or passes, his partner must pass for the rest of the auction. If East makes any other legal call, South may in turn make any legal call. If that call repeats the denomination of his BOOT, then his partner must pass at his next turn. If the call does not repeat the denomination of his BOOT (spades), North must pass whenever it is his turn to call, and the lead penalties of Law 26 may apply. In either case law 23, regarding a damaging enforced pass applies (basically, it says if TD determines NOS were damaged by the enforced pass, he should consider adjusting the score). So the answer to your question is yes, South has made a bid out of turn.  South's actual holding is irrelevant. South should have called the director as soon as he realized the bid he'd put down was not the one he wanted to make. Then the first thing the TD would have done (assuming he determines the TD call was before North's bid) would be to cancel North's bid (Law 9: after the TD is called, no player shall take any action until the TD makes his ruling). If South calls the TD after North bids, he's out of luck. It's too late to change his call. |
bluejak  428 posts Forum Host Reply |
Certainly a mess! Ed has given an excellent summary of a very tricky problem, and there are really only two things to add.
First, he uses bridge abbreviations that are well-known in other forums, but may not be here. I shall soon post a list of such abbreviations, but for ht etime being here are the ones he has used: BOOT: bid out of turn TD: tournament director NOS: non-offending side LHO: left-hand opponent Second, when he says 'South should have called the director as soon as he realized the bid he'd put down was not the one he wanted to make' Ed is theoretically right. But in practice this is not workable. Players correct bidding box errors all the time without benefit of a TD, maybe 50 times a night in hte average claub.
|
| 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 00:49:42 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