RMB1

I read Law 57 and discovered that it almost all about defenders play out of turn. 57C 1/2 were about declarers playing after a defender play out of turn, and I did not get to 57C3.

The appeal-without-merit sanction was introduced in (August) 2016 and was publicised at the Summer Meeting that year. The sanction is forfeiting the deposit standard penalty - 25% top, 6 IMP, 1 VP - in the final method of scoring (The change in standard penalty in August 2018 made a minor change to the AWMS.) There have not been many appeals found to be without merit in the last two years - but there was more than one such in the Premier League in Autumn 2017.

These are both rules in the current laws. If the revoke is discovered in time, the revoke is corrected by offender playing a legal card to the trick and the revoke card become a penalty card. If the revoke is discovered later, the revoke cannot be corrected and the cards stay as played, at the end there is a one or two trick penalty. The details are more complicated and should be read from the law book. The laws change over time but these laws have been much the same over time, except for how many penalty tricks in the second case.

We should not forget that 2NT is only an infraction if they have an agreement to open 2NT on this hand and that agreement is not permitted.

Yes. Law 91B. All the Director needs is a reason ("for cause") and the approval of the TO. The EBU as TO has given authority to the Director to disqualify without further approval.

Technically the Director can only disqualify with the approval of the Tournament Organiser. The Director can suspend a player for the rest of the current session.

West has UI. There are logical alternatives to 3NT, 3NT is suggested by the UI because it could end the auction. If West bids something else, EW will probably find their heart fit and play 4H. 4H probably makes, so little damage.

The ACBL is primarily the zonal body for North America (as in half the continent of the Americas), the equivalent of the European Bridge League. ACBL also has a role as the National Bridge Organisation for the USA, although there are other bodies, and USBF organises selection of USA teams. There are National Bridge Organisations in Canada and Mexico - at least for the purposes of selecting teams.

This clause doesn't assume that the players know what they're doing - but the laws wash their hands of what happens, regardless.

What I envisaged was A-F are board-sets 1-6, .., 31-36 Round 1: 1v4 A, 2v5 A, 3v1 B, 4v2 B, 5v3 C Round 2: 1v3 B, 2v4 B, 3v5 C, 4v1 A, 5v2 A Round 3: 1v5 D, 2v1 E, 3v2 D, 4v3 E, 5v4 F Round 4: 1v2 E, 2v3 D, 3v4 E, 4v5 F, 5v1 D

With any even number of tables you can circulate the boards around the tables in a snake or a loop. For matches of 2N boards you need one set for every N tables, and one to feed in. For 5 or 7 tables, you need three board sets for each pair of rounds, e.g. 1-6, 7-12, 13-18. For 5 tables, you can get away with one set of each board set, the two tables can share six boards. For 7 tables, youo can probably do some sharing but it may be best to have one set of boards per table, 3 x 1-6, 3 x 7-12, 1 x 13-18.

Dummy (the player) is responsible for correctly displaying dummy (the hand). If dummy revokes because a card is not visible, the defence may be entitled to a Law 64C adjustment. If the defenders misdefend because they can not see all of dummy's cards they may be entitled to an adjustment (Law 12A) Declarer claimed and conceded some tricks, and then tried to claim more tricks - declarer is only entitled to more tricks if every normal play of the remaining cards gives him more tricks (Law 71)

National Bidding Box regulation.

Law 31B1 says that dealer has UI. Choosing to Pass appears to be a breach of Law 16B and Law 73C1. The TD should adjust on the basis that dealer makes his systemic opening bid and responder is still subject to Law 31B2.

We all know the answer is no.

The law or regulation that defines when a call is made. To others at the table VixTD's 3NT bid would appear to be the call at that turn and this call is made, according to EBU bidding box regulations.

If there was no intended call then Law 25A1 does not apply.

Self-employed contractors - but I am not sure how the tax system terminology translates. If they were employees they would be entitled to leave and sick play and would pay tax through the employer. Instead they choose when they are available and how they pay their taxes. Robin

Most directors in England are not employees of the club, country or EBU.

There are three major tiers of the EBU organisation: club, county and national. County organisations are based roughly on administrative counties. Administrative counties were reorganised in 1974 and more changes since and local bridge politics has seen separation and amalgamation of the county associations. There are approx. 40 county associations. There are Club Directors for clubs. The County course qualifies County Directors (to run county events) and spot talent for national grade. The national directors are termed "EBU Panel Directors" and have grades: trainee, Congress B, Congress A, Senior and National - in increasing order of responsibility at events. Progress through the grades is by examination and interview.

Is it? Law 64C1 starts "When, after any established revoke, including those not subject to trick adjustment, ..." so I think it applies when other laws do not apply.

The revoke is established, Law 63A4. It is too late to apply Law 64A but Law 64C1 allows the TD to assign an adjusted score. If the TD decides that declarer would always play for the drop when LHO follows small, then the adjusted score would be 100% 7♥=.

The usual suspects disagree. :) I agree. To me "He has an opening bid" = "he has opening values" = "he has a hand that would be opened at the one-level in first or second position playing reasonably sound/traditional system". Others will disagree.

When one defender expresses an opinion and the other is thinking. the other can say "hang on", or "I'm still thinking"

Me?? My reference book in the 1970s was a small red hardback book which gave quite a comprehensive/consistent opening bid / response / rebid structure. I can't find the book on my shelves, or remember the name or author.