benlessard Posted September 30, 2009 Report Share Posted September 30, 2009 Offender side pass all the way but the lead was done with cards from the wrong board. the lead is the J♥ case 1- declarer say "something is wrong there is 2 H jack" case 2- the partner of offender say "i have the H J". case 3- the offender noticed that he has the wrong cards before dummy hit the table case 4 -- the offender realize his mistake after the dummy is put down. What your rulings ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrdct Posted October 1, 2009 Report Share Posted October 1, 2009 case 1- declarer say "something is wrong there is 2 H jack" The ♥J that has been lead has no official status as it is not a card from the actual board that we are playing, so I would simply instruct the offender to put their erroneous hand (including the ♥J) back into the correct board, get their correct hand out of the current board and make an opening lead. I think information that declarer holds the real ♥J is authorised information for the defenders as declarer should not have made such a comment as it would've been much easier to point at the board and say "hey! look at this - your cards are still in the board". I would inform the partner of the offender that it is unauthorised information for him that partner passed throughout the auction looking at the wrong hand (i.e. until other evidence comes to light during the play of the hand, he needs to frame his defence based on the assumption that partner has a hand that would've passed throughout the auction). case 2- the partner of offender say "i have the H J". Similar to Case 1, the manner in which attention has been drawn to the irregularity is inappropriate. Again, I would tell the offender to get the correct hand and find a new opening lead, but now the info that the offender's partner holds the ♥J is unauthorised info for the offender but is authorised info for declarer. As with Case 1, the offender's partner must be careful not to use UI that partner passed throughout looking at the wrong cards. case 3- the offender noticed that he has the wrong cards before dummy hit the table This makes life easier, but all the same UI issues from Case 1 and Case 2 would still apply. case 4 -- the offender realize his mistake after the dummy is put down. I would instruct the offender to take great care not to take any advantage from having seen dummy in selecting their new opening lead and if they happened to find a superior lead when an inferior lead was a logical alternative, I would adjust the board to the likely outcome on the inferior lead. Of course, the same UI issues noted above would still apply. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted October 1, 2009 Report Share Posted October 1, 2009 there is now another forums specifically designed for this matters Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtK78 Posted October 1, 2009 Report Share Posted October 1, 2009 There is a forum for handling leads from a hand contained in a different board? I didn't realize we were getting so specialized. :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jnichols Posted October 2, 2009 Report Share Posted October 2, 2009 Not quite that specialized - There are "Laws and Rulings" and "Simple Rulings" toward the bottom of the lists of forums. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iviehoff Posted October 23, 2009 Report Share Posted October 23, 2009 If you want comments from the real experts, you should post in the Simple Rulings forum. Whilst some interesting rulings have been suggested, there is actually a law that covers the situation, 17D. Though it is in a funny place so easy to overlook. It says: D. Cards from Wrong Board1. A call is cancelled if it is made by a player on cards that he has pickedup from a wrong board.2. After looking at the correct hand the offender calls again and theauction continues normally from that point. If offender’s LHO has calledover the cancelled call the Director shall award artificial adjusted scoreswhen offender’s substituted call differs4 from his cancelled call(offender’s LHO must repeat the previous call) or if the offender’spartner has subsequently called over the cancelled call.3. If the offender subsequently repeats his call on the board from whichhe mistakenly drew his cards the Director may allow that board to beplayed normally, but the Director shall award artificial adjusted scoreswhen offender’s call differs4 from his original cancelled call.4. A procedural penalty (Law 90) may be assessed in addition torectifications under 2 and 3 above. Under 17D2, it is pretty clear that things have gone far too far to rescue the board, so it is cancelled and an artificial adjusted score awarded. Under 17D3, it is looking like the board the cards were wrongly drawn, if the offender is still to play it, will also be cancelled and an artifical adjusted score awarded. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.