Defence find only 'real' way to beat contract by creating a penalty card What Law can u adjust under if at all?
#1
Posted 2011-February-23, 04:16
RHO has AQ♠ sitting over Dummys Kx
To beat it RHO has to duck AKx in their suit to partners queen when the suit is singleton in dummy & declarers hand - the player is highly unlikely to do so.
The preceding trick to the throw-in RHO plays a club (the throw-in suit) and immediately prevents their revoke by correcting to a Heart the played suit.
The club becomes a major penalty card and now RHO has to duck his AK♣and so beat the contract.
What law allows an adjusted score?
Steve
#2
Posted 2011-February-23, 04:26
keledor, on 2011-February-23, 04:16, said:
RHO has AQ♠ sitting over Dummys Kx
To beat it RHO has to duck AKx in their suit to partners queen when the suit is singleton in dummy & declarers hand - the player is highly unlikely to do so.
The preceding trick to the throw-in RHO plays a club (the throw-in suit) and immediately prevents their revoke by correcting to a Heart the played suit.
The club becomes a major penalty card and now RHO has to duck his AK♣and so beat the contract.
What law allows an adjusted score?
Steve
I don't believe you can restore justice here UNLESS you think the revoke was done deliberately (unlikely in this case, he could simply have ducked the next trick if he saw the situation for what it was), this is just luck of the draw.
I'm reminded of a case under rather different laws from many years ago where in 4♠, the wrong defender leads Q♥ face up. At the time, declarer is allowed to call for the lead of any given suit, so picks an advantageous one (clubs), at which point LHO announces he has none of that suit. The Q♥ is picked up, so LHO leads a small heart from AKxxx, his partner wins with the J, club ruff, heart to Q, club ruff, one off no restitution.
#3
Posted 2011-February-23, 04:31
keledor, on 2011-February-23, 04:16, said:
None.
If I read this correctly, the only winning line for a defender is to play a small club from AKx; but on the previous trick he revokes by playing a small club, the revoke is corrected and the small club is a major penalty card, which the defender must play to the crucial trick.
The law has been correctly applied, so there is no further rectification. There has been no damage from the point before the revoke: the defender has just forced himself to do the right thing.
One might look at Law 23:
Quote
But this can hardly apply: if defender knew it was to his advantage to have a small club as a major penalty card then he knew he had to play a small club on the crucial trick, so there was no point in the irregularity.
"Robin Barker is a mathematician. ... All highly skilled in their respective fields and clearly accomplished bridge players."
#4
Posted 2011-February-23, 04:40
wyman, on 2012-May-04, 09:48, said:
rbforster, on 2012-May-20, 21:04, said:
My YouTube Channel
#5
Posted 2011-February-23, 05:02
As for Cyberyeti's story: the information that the player who lead out of turn doesn't have any clubs: is that authorized information to his partner?
#6
Posted 2011-February-23, 05:17

As for the case, nobody said so yet, but if declarer has enough trumps he can just cash one forcing to discard the penalty card, since RHO has still 5 cards left, he probably is able to play a trump unless his trumps are exactly 3-1 at this point.
#7
Posted 2011-February-23, 05:24
helene_t, on 2011-February-23, 05:02, said:
Law 10A says that a player may not waive any rectification on his own initiative.
If this were a Mollo story, the Hog would say "don't worry about the penalty card" (perhaps having to remind the Secretary Bird that dummy should be seen and not heard) and the Rabbit would realise that this was suspicious and play it anyway.
#8
Posted 2011-February-23, 05:28
Fluffy, on 2011-February-23, 05:17, said:

As for the case, nobody said so yet, but if declarer has enough trumps he can just cash one forcing to discard the penalty card, since RHO has still 5 cards left, he probably is able to play a trump unless his trumps are exactly 3-1 at this point.
No, declarer can't play trumps as LHO will win with the queen. He needs to force LHO to play trumps from AQ.
#9
Posted 2011-February-23, 05:29
helene_t, on 2011-February-23, 05:02, said:
I think it is (law 16A3). However, the fact that the other player has the ♥Q is not authorised for his partner (law 50E2), so I don't think the low heart lead is legal.
#10
Posted 2011-February-23, 11:48
#11
Posted 2011-February-23, 18:04
#12
Posted 2011-February-23, 18:45
Echognome, on 2011-February-23, 18:04, said:
This would be relevant if the club-throw-in lead were coming from declarer, and LHO needed to play second-hand high to set the contract. However, it appears from the narrative that the club lead is coming from dummy, and LHO just has to figure out to take the trick in fourth seat, which isn't affected by the penalty card.
#13
Posted 2011-February-23, 19:00
#14
Posted 2011-February-23, 20:18
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
Our ultimate goal on defense is to know by trick two or three everyone's hand at the table. -- Mike777
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
#15
Posted 2011-February-23, 21:32
campboy, on 2011-February-23, 05:24, said:
Indeed, when I read the OP I thought of asking whether the defender showed a particular weakness for chocolate biscuits.
#16
Posted 2011-February-24, 07:54
Merseyside England UK
EBL TD
Currently at home
Visiting IBLF from time to time
<webjak666@gmail.com>
#17
Posted 2011-February-24, 13:43
Quote
Quote
The fact that RHO holds ♥Q is UI - so I would probably disallow the lead of a small ♥ from AKxxx. Unfortunately, most directors forget to tell this part so then you have to give a score which is the best of both worlds...
#18
Posted 2011-February-24, 15:22
Gerben42, on 2011-February-24, 13:43, said:
Cyberyeti said his story was from some time ago. The explicit statement that information from penalty cards is unauthorised (Law 50E2) is new to the current law book and before 2007 it was not clear whether (having complied with the penalty card penalties) the defenders were free to use the information from the lead out of turn.
"Robin Barker is a mathematician. ... All highly skilled in their respective fields and clearly accomplished bridge players."