[blml] Wrong direction

[Torsten Åstrand]

In Sweden is North responsible for the boards. I.e. placed and played 
correctly.
Will that influence your answer?

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <Gampas at aol.com>
To: <blml at amsterdamned.org>
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2007 11:02 AM
Subject: Re: [blml] Wrong direction


> >In a message dated 05/11/2007 08:27:49 GMT Standard Time, 
> >john at asimere.com
> writes:
> Team  play
> EW/W
> K
> AJ9762
> KT2
> J62
> T8642                                 AQ
> T85                                     Q3
> ------                                    J86543
> KQT53                                 A84
> J9753
> K4
> AQ97
> 97
>
> At one table they put the board in the wrong direction and looked at  the
> cards. This board had been played in the other room. 3DX down 4 by East.
> 1100
>
> Normal results are 3-4H down 2-3 by North.
>
> How do you  solve this problem? Kindly refer to used Law or other 
> regulation.<
>
> This happened recently in the Lederer, in England, and I think the 
> relevant
> part of the White Book (12.6, p31) is this:
>
> "If team A gets a good or lucky board against team B and, because of an
> infraction by team B, the board cannot be played at the second table, then 
> the
> non-offenders are entitled to an assigned adjusted score under Law 72B1 – 
> see
> #72.1.
>
> However, from the statement by Torsten in the original posting, "they put
> the board in the wrong direction". Presumably this means both pairs at the
> second table misboarded it, and therefore there were no "non-offenders". 
> The EBU
> confirmed this interpretation at the time, and a substitute board needs 
> to be
> played (if time allows). John Probst would be right if the offenders were
> the team getting the bad result in the other room. If neither pair (or 
> both
> pairs, as here) is to blame:
>
> "However, if team A gets a good or lucky board against team B and, because
> of an outside influence or an unlucky event not caused by team B, the 
> board
> cannot be played at the second table, then team A get no benefit from 
> their good
> or lucky result
> since team B have committed no infraction. This is called 
> "rub-of-the-green".
>
> This does not defend against the Turner Coup (named after the former
> director of the CIA who was a keen bridge player), where one of the team 
> getting  a
> bad result uses slight of hand to rotate the wallet by 90 degrees when 
> putting
> back his cards before the three other hands are replaced in room 1.  The
> director assumes when he gets a result in board 2 that it must have been
> misboarded by both pairs on the second occasion!
>
> Paul
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> blml mailing list
> blml at amsterdamned.org
> http://www.amsterdamned.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
>