Re: if what

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
Robert Frick
Sent: 25 January 2018 14:48
To: Bridge Laws Mailing List <[email protected]>
Subject: [BLML] if what

Axx

KJ1098


Declarer leads the jack from hand towards Axx in dummy in 3NT. LHO, holding
xx, tries to remember the proper discard playing Smith Echoes. Declarer
plays him for the queen and makes only 3 when the finesse loses and the
opponents run hearts. Declarer can cash out for making 4.

So I have no desire to punish, but I want to rectify and give the declarer
what he would have made if __.

But if what? How many he would have made if LHO had given away the position
of the queen? (Making 7). Or if LHO had played "normal tempo" and not given
away the position of the queen (not risking the finesse, cashing out and
making 4).
_______________________________________________
Blml mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml

Well Robert you just have to make up your mind what you think is right.

Talk to declarer's LHO.  Read him Law 73D.  Explain that deciding which card
to play from two small is not a "demonstrable bridge reason".  Use the
wondrous "Probst test".  Ask the player what a cheat would try to do in such
a situation.  (obviously hesitate with two small).  Assure the player that
there is no question of treating this hesitation as "cheating", but point
out that this is why care must be taken and you intend to consider adjusting
the score, namely to consider what was likely if the play of the small card
had been in tempo.

Ask declarer what his plans were.  We all know that everyone will say, "Oh I
was going to win the Ace and finesse on the way back - 13 tricks to me", but
you don't have to believe that.  Their may be a bridge reason for adopting
this line based on bidding or previous play.   You have to decide.

It seems to me that it is very unlikely that any declarer will finesse at
this point.  Surely if you are going to play for ten tricks you will play
Ace.  You could a reason why a player might have tried to go down but 3NT+1
seems a reasonable frequent score and 3NT-1 unlikely.   A player might
advance a reason for the 13 trick line - "11 tricks were laydown in Spades,
my only chance of a good score was making more in NTs".

I can't imagine a high percentage of 3NT -1  so I'll give that zero.
80%   +1
20%   +4	might be a possible weighting

Though if the answers to our questions suggest declarer was very likely to
make 13 tricks you should be brave enough to award that. 

Any player who knows enough to play Smith, should know Law 73.  In addition
to adjusting the score, I would make a procedural penalty, probably twice
our standard in the EBU so 2*10% or whatever you apply.
I would remind the offending player and partner of their right to appeal,
but would not expect an appeals committee to give them 3NT-1 back!

The key question is "What would declarer's possible scores have been if LHO
had played in tempo?".  

Mike

_______________________________________________
Blml mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml