Revoke and reaction
Hi
This hand, board no 5, was played on Tuesday night 16/8/22
West Is declarer in 4S with SQJ, HA5, DAJ98732, CK3.
East has SA6532, HKJT987, D5, C8.
After some play East has SA65 and all the hearts, NS have won a C and a S and each have one spade in hand.
West leads the 5H to the K, then the H7 towards the A. South revokes and trumps. South leads a diamond and N trumps.
I am called to the table and say there is a two trick penalty, play on.
West insists he wants more tricks as he should make 4S without the revoke. I mention it would have been a good idea to draw their trumps. Clearly a bad move as I get a detailed explanation of his plan.
Much ill feeling and saying I am wrong. West then puts the remaining cards in his hand face down in the lost position and the board is scored minus 4 but plus 2 transferred making minus 2 for minus 100.
I am the playing director so decide to look at the hand later.
North at this point has only clubs. NS have 4 tricks so declarer is one off.
North can only lead a club which declarer can trump in dummy and all the hearts are good.
With the 2 trick penalty applied he scores 5S as shown in the makeables but he has thrown down his cards and not played because he wants more tricks transferred.
West then spends the rest of the night saying I am wrong, wrong, wrong.
Presumably I should now correct this score to 5S making as West cannot lose tricks he is entitled to but he wanted to make his diamonds and could see he no longer had an entry to his hand and couldn't see dummy was good .
It's not going to make a major improvement to his score as he was so angry he played really badly for the rest of the night.
Latest Posts on this Thread
- NICK WHITTEN17 Aug 2022 at 10:21PM
It is not clear exactly what went on but it appears declarer would have made all the remaining tricks after the revoke and subsequent diamond ruff.
IOW 9 tricks in all.
With the 2-trick adjustment that would come to making 11 tricksWhich is the same as what would have been made had the revoke not occurred (this is not necessarily always the case – which is why Law 64C1 exists).
So where is the problem??
The problem is West’s conceding several tricks putting the contract down 4 (altered to down 2 with the adjustment)
That result should stand as tricks conceded are always lost (unless it is IMPOSSIBLE to lose them)
The damage to West is entirely self-inflicted
- GILES HANCOCK21 Aug 2022 at 06:51PM
If the revoke is estabished, wait until the end of the hand to make a ruling.
If they wnat more (damage) then ask them to tell you how, and that you will have a think about it. Being a playing director, if you have not played the board yet, you have even more reason not to go into analysis until later, maybe the end of the session.
- BETTY HOPLEY21 Aug 2022 at 09:46PM
I had played the board.
West wanted the hand scored as making 5 without playing on as requested. - NICK WHITTEN22 Aug 2022 at 11:24AM
If West had followed the correct procedure the result would have been adjusted to making 5
So by his actions he just self-destructed
Which is fine in a "bridge" prespectiveBut in a general prespective his behaviour appears unacceptable and the Regional Recorder should be notified
- GILES HANCOCK24 Aug 2022 at 02:15PM
Agree with Nick. West doesn't get to play Director.
- BETTY HOPLEY24 Aug 2022 at 02:40PM
The player has apologised profusely. He is not normally a problem and is unlikely to do this again.
You need to be logged in to reply to threads.
Click here to log in.
Click here to log in.
