pause for thought (USA)

[DJNeill]

Hi all,

 

RHO is in 4NT, and with this heart suit:

 

dummy:

KQTx

 

declarer:

Ax

 

plays the hA, then a low heart and calls for the Ten. She is frail, and about 4 seconds later meekly says K..K..K..King. My partner is frailer and was unable to find the hJ in 4 seconds to cover the Ten. I call the director, who looks at her hand, sees that she had 10 top tricks without the finesse, and lets her take it back.

 

Shoot the declarer or the director?

 

Thanks,

Dan

[pran]

Hi all,

 

RHO is in 4NT, and with this heart suit:

 

dummy:

KQTx

 

declarer:

Ax

 

plays the hA, then a low heart and calls for the Ten.  She is frail, and about 4 seconds later meekly says K..K..K..King.  My partner is frailer and was unable to find the hJ in 4 seconds to cover the Ten.  I call the director, who looks at her hand, sees that she had 10 top tricks without the finesse, and lets her take it back.

 

Shoot the declarer or the director?

 

Thanks,

Dan

I am always lenient with players suffering from any kind of disability that affects their play.

 

If the scoring is IMP rather than MP that adds IMO towards the TD ruling.

 

But that much said: Any director that looks at a hand involved in a situation and then announces his ruling should be .... well, maybe not exactly shot, but very close to.

 

(The strict lawbook ruling is of course that the ten was played)

[bluejak]

Really? Does not your Law book have something about different intention and incontrovertible?

 

It is not easy, but I ask her why she said ten, and try and find out the correct ruling.

[pran]

Really? Does not your Law book have something about different intention and incontrovertible?

 

It is not easy, but I ask her why she said ten, and try and find out the correct ruling.

If you time it 4 seconds is a long time to not be a pause for thought. The description doesn't seem like a mistaken action discovered after 4 seconds and never intended.

 

Unless as I indicated: If some kind of disability is involved. Inviting selv serving statements hardly helps the Director, there are better ways of investigating.

[JoAnneM]

I was in a similar situation, being in 4th seat and I already had the jack out and ready to lay on the table when the call was changed. This was at a Sectional and the Director (a new one) allowed the change. Upon checking later with the DIC I was told the ruling was wrong. Actually the hand became quite a discussion in some director forum that they have.

 

Not realizing that the 10 is not in sequence with the KQ is lack of concentration for which there should not be a remedy.

[Lanor Fow]

What is the best way of finding out intention apart from asking Pran? Whilst other evidence is useful, and self serving statements need to be taken with a pinch of salt, i am confused as to why you would ignore them intirely. Surely the best way to investigate (as in all other investigations) is to gather as much evidence as possible, rather than discounting some right off the bat. That said I am new to this, so please correct me where I'm going wrong.

[pran]

What is the best way of finding out intention apart from asking Pran?  Whilst other evidence is useful, and self serving statements need to be taken with a pinch of salt, i am confused as to why you would ignore them intirely.  Surely the best way to investigate (as in all other investigations) is to gather as much evidence as possible, rather than discounting some right off the bat.  That said I am new to this, so please correct me where I'm going wrong.

If you ask me I shall tell you that in such (and similar) cases I frequently ask the other three players at the table their impression of the situation: Do they feel that offender was caught by surprise over his own (allegedly unintended) action or was their impression that the offender indeed changed his mind?

 

My experience through thirty years of directing in Norway is that the players give honest answers when I consult them as witnesses in order to assess what really happened.

 

And if I still cannot to my satisfaction establish the facts I apply the principle for instance expressed in Law 46: "except when declarer’s different intention is incontrovertible" and rule that the alleged different intention is certainly not incontrovertible.

[DJNeill]

Yes, she was not really thinking much and this was just a case of the director looking at the hand and determining how she would play the hand, which is a no-no. However, since I couldn't quote the law, what can I do but shrug.

 

Thanks,

Dan