[blml] Law 64B7

[Harald Skjæran]

On 30/04/2008, gesta at tiscali.co.uk <gesta at tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Grattan Endicott<gesta at tiscali.co.uk
> [following address discontinued:
> grandeval at vejez.fsnet.co.uk]
> *************************
> "we that live to please
>  must please to live"
>        ~ Dr Samuel Johnson
> *************************
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John (MadDog) Probst" <john at asimere.com>
> To: "Bridge Laws Mailing List" <blml at amsterdamned.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2008 2:06 AM
> Subject: Re: [blml] Law 64B7
>
>
>
> >
> >> +=+ I think you should read the law as it is written. Why should
> >> you think what it says was not intended?
> >
> > Mainly because of the problems where both sides revoke on a
> > single trick and the guidance handed down re 1997 Laws. it's not
> > a big deal when one side revokes at trick 3; calls you at trick 5,
> > so you assess the penalty and the other side revokes a trick 7 so
> > now you assess a further penalty, whereas in future you cancel
> > the previous penalty. We've never been close to that scenario.  I
> > don't mind either way, but it seems an odd change to me, and if
> > that's what was intended, fine.
> >
> >>
> +=+ Well, the fact is that the item was discussed in
> some detail and, with varying degrees of enthusiasm
> among the DSC members, it was agreed that tricks
> passing to and fro on the same board should be avoided.
>        By the way, I understood that you would decide
> whether the revoke was established when first called to
> the table; I had thought under the 1997 code you would
> leave the nature of the penalty to the end of the hand.

I guess John meant that he'd inform the players as to the nature of
the penalty when called. As a TD should. A revoker not winning the
revoke trick should be informed at that time that the penalty might
vary according to him later winning a trick or not with a card that
could lawfully have been played to the revoke trick.

-- 
Kind regards,
Harald Skjæran

>                                     ~ Grattan ~   +=+
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> blml mailing list
> blml at amsterdamned.org
> http://www.amsterdamned.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
>