Re: Toronto 2017 case R6
Herman De Wael <[email protected]> Fri, 23 Feb 2018 13:45:55 +0100
| Newsgroups | gmane.games.bridge.laws |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
I consider his mention as "I will be bidding at my turn" not as a bid, but as an extraneous remark. brian wrote: > 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 > > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. > http://www.avg.com > _______________________________________________ Blml mailing list [email protected] http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml