[blml] Correction of a revoke

[John Probst]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jerry Fusselman" <jfusselman at gmail.com>
To: "Bridge Laws Mailing List" <blml at amsterdamned.org>
Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2008 11:08 PM
Subject: Re: [blml] Correction of a revoke


> On Jan 2, 2008 2:11 PM,  <Gampas at aol.com> wrote:
>> In a message dated 02/01/2008 19:26:58 GMT Standard Time,
>> ereppert at rochester.rr.com writes:
>>
>> > Your logic seems to imply that
>> > paying sufficient attention  to the game requires seeing the opponent's
>> > hands every time one  claims.
>>
>> I think his logic implies that paying sufficient attention to  the
>> game means that one will know what's in opponents' hands when  one
>> claims. A supposition that is probably true at expert level,  and
>> nowhere close to true at the level at which I play. :-)
>>
>> [paul lamford] Whether you notice that an opponent has revoked may be
>> unrelated to whether you paid attention or not. For example, you play 6NT 
>> by South
>> on the following hands on the lead of the QS.
>>
>> S AK5
>> H AQ9
>> D AK
>> C AQJ32
>>
>> S 432
>> H JT3
>> D QJ
>> C KT987
>>
>> You win the lead and cross to the ten of clubs on which West shows out. 
>> You
>> take the heart finesse which loses and you say: One down, I will not 
>> insult
>> you  by playing them out, a spade to you. At half-time you notice that 
>> West did
>> have  a club. It is now too late to do anything about it, but you have 
>> not
>> been  inattentive in any way.

Opponent's failure to face their hands is a 72B1 position. I'll try that 
route.

John

>>
>
> Nice example, Paul.  That is indeed exactly what Konrad and I were
> thinking of.  Konrad just gave a similar example, where his team lost
> about 30 IMPs.  I have to agree with Konrad 100% on his points.
>
> Jerry Fusselman
>
> _______________________________________________
> blml mailing list
> blml at amsterdamned.org
> http://www.amsterdamned.org/mailman/listinfo/blml