[blml] Clubbed Queen [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

[Tim West-Meads]

Richard wrote:

> Therefore, if I was the El Supremo of the WBF :-), I would
> delete "upon the request of the non-offending side" from the
> 2008 version of Law 81C8.

Would this make much difference to the way you rule these scenarios?

I know that my (even marginally) ethical players will say things like 
"It doesn't seem fair that I should benefit from calling the wrong 
card." and when told they can ask me to waive the penalty will make that 
request.  They feel just as guilty as had they spilt coffee in someone's 
lap.  In fact even Alcatraz-ish players will request a waiver after I 
have explained (as part of my ruling) that I'll be looking at the hand 
later under L72b1.  The difference being that the A-ish players have now 
been warned that I'm onto them and know they'd be ill-advised to try 
coffee-housing in *my* games unless they believe they are one hell of a 
lot more devious than I can imagine.

If they don't ask for a waiver I see little difference between waiving 
the penalty as TD and adjusting the score under L72b1.  "You could have 
known that throwing coffee into X's lap stands a good chance of creating 
penalty cards."  If the layout is such that a penalty card makes no 
difference to the result then both L72b1 and the waiver are irrelevant.

Tim