Re: Toronto 2017 case R6

On 02/22/2018 09:26 PM, David Grabiner wrote:
> The Director is within his rights to adjust the score.  North
> committed an infraction, and since the Laws do not provide a specific
> redress for this infraction, the Director should make a ruling which
> restores equity.
> 

I understand that the fact that this is at the seven level makes
things a little unusual, but under more normal circumstances, would
there not be some logic to treating North's announcement as a bid out
of rotation?


Brian.


> On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 8:56 PM, Richard Hills <[email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> 
>     The Appeals Committee applied a Disciplinary Penalty of 4 Victory
>     Points to North's side. But the question I am interested in is
>     whether or not the Director exceeded their powers in adjusting the
>     score.
> 
>     Best wishes,
> 
>     Richard Hills
> 
>     Sent from my iPad
> 
>     > On 23 Feb 2018, at 3:10 AM, Bill Kemp <[email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>     >
>     > No consideration of a disciplinary penalty for disrupting the
>     auction?
>     > Bill
>     >
>     > Sent from my iPad
>     >
>     >> On 22 Feb 2018, at 13:50, Richard Hills <[email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>     >>
>     >> In an auction which was competitive up to the 7-level, East has
>     just bid 7D. Before South has a chance to generate UI by breaking
>     tempo, North forestalled South's break-in-tempo by announcing
>     that, "I am bidding 7S no matter what you do." Now relieved of any
>     burden of responsibility, South is able to double 7D in tempo. As
>     advertised, North converts to 7S, which is cold for 13 tricks, +2210.
>     >>
>     >> The Director ruled:
>     >>
>     >> A) Without North's extraneous remark, South would have broken
>     tempo before doubling 7D.
>     >> B) Defending 7Dx was a logical alternative to bidding 7S.
>     >> C) The hypothetical break-in-tempo demonstrably suggested
>     removing to 7S.
>     >> D) Hence the score was adjusted to 7Dx -800.
>     >>
>     >> The Appeals Committee ruled:
>     >>
>     >> Y) Without South actually breaking tempo, North does not
>     actually hold any Unauthorized Information, hence North can choose
>     any call.
>     >> Z) Thus the table score of 7S +2210 was restored.
>     >>
>     >> Best wishes,
>     >>
>     >> Richard Hills
>     >>
>     >> Sent from my iPad
>     >> _______________________________________________
>     >> Blml mailing list
>     >> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>     >> http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
>     <http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml>
>     >
>     > _______________________________________________
>     > Blml mailing list
>     > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>     > http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
>     <http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Blml mailing list
>     [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>     http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
>     <http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Blml mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
> 

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