[blml] Correction of a revoke [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

[Ed Reppert]

On Jan 2, 2008, at 5:44 PM, richard.hills at immi.gov.au wrote:

> 2007 Law 72B3:
>
> A player may not attempt to conceal an infraction, as
> by committing a second revoke, concealing a card
> involved in a revoke or mixing the cards prematurely.
>
> Richard Hills:
>
> Some years ago I was playing against Aussie junior
> international Mark Abraham.  He accidentally committed
> a revoke, but failed to notice his error until the
> revoke was established.  When I claimed, Mark obeyed
> the 1997 version of the above Law by displaying face
> up his remaining cards.  I was then able to notice
> that Mark had revoked, so the Director was summoned to
> give the appropriate ruling.
>
> A fine example of ethics by Mark Abraham, although it
> was only possible due to his detailed knowledge of the
> Lawbook - I note that no other blmler has mentioned
> the 2007 Law 72B3 / 1997 Law 72B4.  If all blmlers
> overlook a key and relevant Law, what hope do mere
> ordinary players have in attempts to play Lawfully?

One wonders why, if the lawmakers consider it ethical* to show one's  
cards when an opponent claims, the laws do not explicitly require him  
to do so. (The laws do say that the TD *may* require all four hands  
to be faced, but this is in connection with a contested claim. If the  
claimer's opponents are not going to contest it, the laws on claims  
are mute on the question.

* given that the laws of a game define its ethics.