Page 0023

APR_08_EB_p23 Jeremy 14/3/08 2:33 pm Page 23

Revokes and

EBU PROBLEMS

mistaken explanations

E-mail your questions to Jeremy Dhondy at ebuproblems@btopenworld.com

or write to the editor, Elena Jeronimidis, at 23 Erleigh Road, Reading RG1 5LR.

Please include your name and address.

side had played to the next trick, the

MICK Spencer, of Bury St Edmunds. answer is yes.

asks: Is there room for discretion in b. Should it be one trick or two? Law

our game? On a club duplicate night I 64A2 says that if the player who

bid to 6♦ as East and received a revoked won the offending trick and Jeremy Dhondy

trump lead: took subsequent tricks then there

should be a two-trick penalty but

here dummy, not you, won the top

♠ K54 ♠ 10 club on which you revoked so it If there has been a misunderstanding in the

♥ 9

W

N

E

♥ AQ64 should have been a one-trick penalty. course of the auction, then declarer should

♦ A742 S

♦ KQJ95 Why can’t directors read the law correct after bidding has ended because

♣ K Q J 10 3 ♣ A98 book when making rulings like this? his partner cannot derive any advantage.

However, the defenders must never do this

because they give information to their

I drew trumps in three rounds and JOHN Pickering by e-mail asks about partner. West thinks 3♣ was natural and

then played three top clubs and on the the following deal: he must not be told by East that it is not. If

third threw the ten of spades. I asked North-South are damaged, they may get

dummy to play a fourth club, and then an adjusted score later.

said: ‘Oh dear, I still have a club.’ My Dealer North Secondly, you need to decide if what you

left-hand opponent, who was also the ♠AK98753 are dealing with is a misbid or a mistaken

director for the night, said: ‘Yes, you ♥KQJ8 explanation. If it is a misbid, i.e. East

have revoked. Play on.’ ♦A5 psyched, then any damage to North-South

I made twelve tricks, but was told ♣ Void is basically ‘rub of the green’ but if it is

my revoke cost me two tricks. No-one ♠ 6 ♠ Q J 10 4 2 mistaken explanation, i.e. East-West had

else had bid 6♦. My opponents had ♥ A9 W

N

E

♥5 an agreement that 3♣ shows spades and

S

suffered no harm by my play of the ♦ Q984 ♦KJ763 diamonds, you now ask: was any damage

spade on the third club and not the ♣ AQ7532 ♣98 caused?

fourth. The strict interpretation of the ♠ Void I think South must have been asleep not

laws gave this pair a top instead of a ♥ 10 7 6 4 3 2 to double 3♣ as it seems the natural thing

bottom on this board. Are the laws of ♦ 10 2 to do at the time, but given that he passed,

our game intended to give such a ♣ K J 10 6 4 might North have done something else? If

bizarre outcome? he had been given a correct explanation,

he would not have bid 5♠ knowing there

West North East South were five of them on his left, so yes, I think

You arrive in a game which is completely 2♣ 3♣1 Pass he is damaged.

cold but through carelessness you fail to 5♣2 5♠ All Pass As to any adjustment: East only knows

draw the last trump and sustain a ruff. You 1

Systemically Ghestem showing something has gone wrong because of

are one down and everyone else makes the spades and diamonds but West the failure of his partner to alert but if

contract. Do your opponents deserve their forgot and did not alert there were an alert and his partner bid

good board? Whether they do or not, they 2

North asked about 3♣ and West 5♣ he would have no reason to remove

profit from your carelessness, and all of us explained it as natural. it, so 5♣ doubled seems reasonable to

who play pairs know that there are me. It looks as if it goes three down

evenings when the opponents do nothing Before leading, East announced that (losing a diamond, a spade and three

but fall on their swords and equally his 3♣ actually showed 5♠ and 5♦. trumps), which is poor reward as North-

evenings where they seem never to depart Should he have? South can make 6♥ but it is at least

from double-dummy lines. In the deal North stated that he was damaged better than 5♠ minus three.

given above you were careless, so I can’t because if it had been explained that In addition, it is possible that North-

see why you shouldn’t expect to pay a East held 5♠ and 5♦ he would not South were further damaged because South

penalty. The only things to ask are: have bid 5♠ but doubled instead. might have had the opportunity to do

A. Was the revoke established? As your something else if correctly informed.

www.ebu.co.uk April 2008 English Bridge 23

Index

  1. Page 0001
  2. Page 0002
  3. Page 0003
  4. Page 0004
  5. Page 0005
  6. Page 0006
  7. Page 0007
  8. Page 0008
  9. Page 0009
  10. Page 0010
  11. Page 0011
  12. Page 0012
  13. Page 0013
  14. Page 0014
  15. Page 0015
  16. Page 0016
  17. Page 0017
  18. Page 0018
  19. Page 0019
  20. Page 0020
  21. Page 0021
  22. Page 0022
  23. Page 0023
  24. Page 0024
  25. Page 0025
  26. Page 0026
  27. Page 0027
  28. Page 0028
  29. Page 0029
  30. Page 0030
  31. Page 0031
  32. Page 0032
  33. Page 0033
  34. Page 0034
  35. Page 0035
  36. Page 0036
  37. Page 0037
  38. Page 0038
  39. Page 0039
  40. Page 0040
  41. Page 0041
  42. Page 0042
  43. Page 0043
  44. Page 0044
  45. Page 0045
  46. Page 0046
  47. Page 0047
  48. Page 0048
  49. Page 0049
  50. Page 0050
  51. Page 0051
  52. Page 0052
  53. Page 0053
  54. Page 0054
  55. Page 0055
  56. Page 0056