[blml] Fwd: Re: Revoke then adjust to different contract

[Alain Gottcheiner]

>Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2006 10:19:10 +0200
>To: "David Grabiner" <grabiner at alumni.princeton.edu>
>From: Alain Gottcheiner <agot at ulb.ac.be>
>Subject: Re: [blml] Revoke then adjust to different contract
>
>At 23:51 6/09/2006 -0400, you wrote:
>>N-S play in 4H, a contract which they may have reached through use of UI.
>>Ten tricks are cold, but West revokes.  After the adjustment, N-S take 11
>>tricks, which is impossible without the revoke.  (E-W had taken two aces at
>>the first two tricks, and West revoked later by overruffing with the high
>>trump.) -620 is already a bad score for E-W, so they are still entitled to
>>an adjustment.
>>
>>How do you treat the revoke when awarding an adjusted score, if you adjust
>>to a different contract?
>
>When adjusting, consider the number of tricks that would have been made in 
>the contract you correct to, resolving close cases in favor of the NOS, 
>weighting if you feel you have to (my inclination is to do it as often as 
>possible).
>The number of tricks that were actually made in 4H is irrelevant, as this 
>contract is 'inexistent'.
>Therefore, the revoke is immaterial.
>
>Even if the case was about a line of play, I would be very careful before 
>I consider the number of tricks that were actually made, because :
>- one doesn't play the same way in, say, 3NT and 6NT ;
>- it is legitimate, when dealing with UI, to play as if opponents' actions 
>were proper after receiving UI. For example, if opponents pushed you to 
>5H, but their 5C bid could have been affected by UI, you might decide to 
>play for freakish hands (that would make 5C legitimate even after UI), 
>while you wouldn't have done so absent UI. This has been said here before.
>
>Best regards,
>
>    Alain