Mr Bridge
card fan

mrbridge.co.uk

for BRIDGE Magazine, holidays and much more

Welcome to our Community!

If you want to take part in the discussions, sign in or apply for membership below.

Penalty for a revoke

edited April 2010 in Bridge Laws
My partner and I were defending against 2NT. When we got in, With 2 small hearts on table and 5 in my hand to Ace king ten, I led the 8. We took the 1st 3 rounds,my partner having the Queen; on the 3rd round declarer discarded a club. When I played a 4th round, declarer overtook with the Jack and we called the director.
We were asked how many trick had been played since the revoke, and when we told him one we were told declarer must deduct one from his final score.
Is this right... had he not revoked we would have made all 5 hearts and an outside ace... as it was we never got in again and he made his contract with a long diamond suit

Comments

  • edited 9:09PM
    No, its wrong.
    The director's question was probably "Did the revoker win the trick on which he revoked?" Answer No.
    "Did the revoker's side win any further tricks?" Answer Yes.
    At this point, the decision that one trick be transferred is correct, but its not the end.

    The rules then say, that if, as in this case, the result of the normal application of the rules disadvantages the non-offending side, the Director should further adjust the score. You should definitely have been given your 5 Heart tricks and outside Ace, but I'm not sure whether there is any further penalty to the offending side. Probably not, but someone else might know better than me.
  • edited 9:09PM
    *You should definitely have been given your 5 Heart tricks and outside Ace, but I'm not sure whether there is any further penalty to the offending side. Probably not, but someone else might know better than me*

    There is no further penalty.
  • edited 9:09PM
    The above comments are correct but why on earth with such a simple ruling can't the director use the book. Players aren't expceted to know all the laws but the director is expected to use the tools at his disposal.
    Law 64 covers what to do after a revoke is established and Law 64C covers what to do if the standard rectification does not give equity as seems to be the position here.
  • edited 9:09PM
    AKT82 opposite Qxx
    Jxx with declarer

    This does not make sense. You lead to the Q. Small back to the T. Now cash A and K.
    Declarer cannot get away with hiding the J with 2 discards. The error would be noticed. Without the T. it could happen.
    I actually suspect that declarer was more than merely careless. You do not "lose" the JH in such a situation. As soon as he discarded I would check whether he had revoked. My partner cannot have the J as he would have played it 1st round. So we "know" declarer must have it.
Sign In or Register to comment.