[blml] Revoke established?

[Roger Pewick]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John Probst" <john at asimere.com>
To: "Jan Peter Pals" <J.P.Pals at uva.nl>; "Sven Pran" <svenpran at online.no>;
"blml" <blml at rtflb.org>
Sent: Sunday, November 05, 2006 19:30 PM
Subject: Re: [blml] Revoke established?


>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Jan Peter Pals" <J.P.Pals at uva.nl>
> To: "Sven Pran" <svenpran at online.no>; "blml" <blml at rtflb.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 04, 2006 11:19 AM
>
>
> >But what about L63a1: A revoke becomes established when the offender or
> >his partner leads or plays to the following trick (any such play,
> >**legal or illegal**, establishes the revoke).
>
> There was no play.

Once again John's keen insight is profound.  I suggest examining the effect:

Now For the sake of demonstration consider dummy's hand where a spade is the
OL and the SA is singleton in dummy.  Dummy uninstructed plops it in a
played position.  At T3 it is pointed out that no card from dummy was
+played+ to T1.  Since the SA has not been played it +must+ be returned to
dummy's hand whereby T1 is defective and thus was won by one of the three
cards +played+ to it.  Per L67 T1 must be corrected and one of dummy's cards
added to T1- ostensibly the ace.  And that correction does not affect
ownership of T1.

regards
roger pewick

> Only declarer can play a card from dummy. The 63A1
> applies to a play such as a revoke from a player in turn. I'm clear in my
> own mind on this one. Other interpretations cause 'orrible problems.
|John

> >Cheers JP