[olegru]

Just sanity check.

South declarer in 4♥. Two cards ending.

---

West on lead.
By this moment declarer took 10 tricks on crossruff and defenders took 1.

West plays club, East ruff by Ace of trumps and continue the ace of clubs. (Slow absent minded play, not claim).
After board is completed, dummy called for director (other player did not notice anything wrong).
What should be decision?

[blackshoe]

Two tricks to the defense. Law 64B6 and Law 64C. The former law says there is no rectification for an established revoke on trick 12, the latter discusses the TD's right and duty to award an adjusted score to do equity. Equity here is two tricks to the defense.

[pran]

blackshoe, on 2014-July-11, 08:54, said:

Two tricks to the defense. Law 64B6 and Law 64C. The former law says there is no rectification for an established revoke on trick 12, the latter discusses the TD's right and duty to award an adjusted score to do equity. Equity here is two tricks to the defense.

Sorry,
while your ruling is correct you apply the wrong Law!

Law 62D said:

Revoke on Trick Twelve

1. On the twelfth trick, a revoke, even if established, must be corrected if discovered before all four hands have been returned to the board.

2. If a revoke by a defender occurs on the twelfth trick and before it was the turn of his partner to play to the trick, when offender’s partner has cards of two suits he may not choose the play that could possibly have been suggested by seeing the revoke card.

There is never any question of restoring equity after a revoke on trick twelve.

[olegru]

Thanks, now I feel much better
Sorry, just to make sure.
What would be adjustment in case of 3 cards ending, like that:

---

Story is the same.
Contract 4♥ from South
West plays club, East ruff by Ace of trumps and continue the ace of clubs. West ruffs at trick 12 and take the last trick.
After board is completed, dummy called for director (other player did not notice anything wrong).

[aguahombre]

olegru, on 2014-July-11, 09:13, said:

Thanks, now I feel much better
Sorry, just to make sure.
What would be adjustment in case of 3 cards ending, like that:

---

Story is the same.
Contract 4♥ from South
West plays club, East ruff by Ace of trumps and continue the ace of clubs. West ruffs at trick 12 and take the last trick.
After board is completed, dummy called for director (other player did not notice anything wrong).

On that second example, Ed would seem to want to restore equity..by allowing the same 3 tricks to the defense. But, revoke laws only mention "equity" when the revoke penalty is insufficient to restore the result the NOS would have achieved without the revoke (TD makes a further adjustment).

So, here, none of that applies. The defender who revoked won the trick with his revoke. Then he established the revoke. The defense won tricks after the revoke. 2-trick PENALTY...equity is not involved.

The revoke was not at trick 12, even though the establishing trick was trick 12; so the "trick 12" thing no longer applies as it would have in your first scenario.

[blackshoe]

aguahombre, on 2014-July-11, 09:54, said:

On that second example, Ed would seem to want to restore equity..by allowing the same 3 tricks to the defense.

No. I want to apply the law… correctly.

East revoked on trick 11, winning that trick and two more. Two trick penalty to EW (Law 64A1).

[weejonnie]

With the amusing result that EW only made one trick holding AKQ of trumps!

[blackshoe]

Not the first time, and it won't be the last.

[barmar]

The person I'm playing with today in Vegas was telling me about something that happened to him yesterday with another partner. His partner had shown out on a trump trick, and later in the hand he claimed 3 trump tricks holding the KQT of trumps over declarer, putting declarer down 5. It turned out that his partner had trumps -- declarer was playing in a 5-1 fit. Two tricks were transferred, so it was only down 3. They still got 11 matchpoints out of 12, because the field was in a part score their way. But they were half a matchpoint out of making the overalls -- without the revoke they would have scratched.

[weejonnie]

barmar, on 2014-July-21, 20:22, said:

The person I'm playing with today in Vegas was telling me about something that happened to him yesterday with another partner. His partner had shown out on a trump trick, and later in the hand he claimed 3 trump tricks holding the KQT of trumps over declarer, putting declarer down 5. It turned out that his partner had trumps -- declarer was playing in a 5-1 fit. Two tricks were transferred, so it was only down 3. They still got 11 matchpoints out of 12, because the field was in a part score their way. But they were half a matchpoint out of making the overalls -- without the revoke they would have scratched.

Shouldn't that have been only 1 trick - the revoke card didn't win a trick (unless the TD was restoring equity)?

[barmar]

I may not be recalling it entirely accurately.