who revoked?

[manudude03]

[hv=pc=n&s=sqjhakqt9dk652c83&n=sk75h53dat987ca74&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1hp1np2dp3dppp]266|200[/hv]

 

Perhaps you both underbid. Either way, you're in 3 diamonds on a trump lead. You draw 2 rounds of trumps (breaking 2-2), cash AKQ of hearts, East showing out on the third. You then lead a fourth heart and West shows out! The jack of hearts is out there somewhere. If you call director, he tells you to play on and call him back in the end. Do you play for the drop or take a ruffing finesse (yes you are gaining 2 tricks nomatter what, but maybe you can beat the LOLs in 1NT/2NT making 4....)

[helene_t]

why not ruff? you can ruff both hearts and discard your club loser on a spade. Making twelve tricks plus the revome penalty. Did I miss something?

[manudude03]

why not ruff? you can ruff both hearts and discard your club loser on a spade. Making twelve tricks plus the revome penalty. Did I miss something?

 

Good point, I was asleep when I played it so completely missed that option lol. Perhaps if the problem was with declarer having 1 less spade and 1 more club, that way you still have a club loser. Admittedly the hands aren't quite accurate (I seem to remember only having a 13 count). Wish I had hand records (it was a normal club night)

[dkham]

Agree with above, as dummy reverse you can make 2 spades, 5 hearts, 4 diamonds and ace of clubs.

 

Also I think East revoked.

[Cyberyeti]

If the revoke penalty is 2 tricks, it doesn't matter if you make 11 or 12 :)

 

Reminds me of a different twilight zone situation I faced, ever had a 2 way finesse position against a king in no trumps ?

 

N ♠AQ ♣2

 

S ♠xx ♣7

 

E has a small spade penalty card, the lead is with N and all the opps other cards are spades. You have a choice of leading the Q from dummy if you think E has the K, or playing a club to hand relieving E of his penalty card and taking the orthodox finesse if you think W has it.

[campboy]

Let's suppose there was a club lead, so you need to get it right to make 13 tricks. It is difficult to see anyone making exactly 10 tricks in NT, so the only people we are really competing with are those in diamond partials who should all make exactly 12 tricks. If East revoked we can guarantee 13 by playing for the drop, but if West revoked we can't guarantee 13 since he may notice before it gets established.

[WellSpyder]

I'm confused about the application of the laws, here. (Perhaps that is why the hand isn't in the laws forum...)

 

First, I don't think I understand why you think you are getting 2 tricks from the revoke rather than just one.

 

Second, I don't quite follow what happens if you call the TD. If it is West who has revoked, then surely it can still be corrected before it is established? Now that attention has been drawn to it, doesn't it have to be corrected? If so, then assuming the TD hasn't made a complete mess of things then I will play East for HJ since if he is the one who has revoked it is too late to correct it.

[barmar]

Law 62A says that the revoke must be corrected if the player becomes aware of it before it's established. But just because attention has been drawn and the TD has been called doesn't mean that the revoker will become aware of his mistake. Maybe the ♥J is hidden behind another card, and he still doesn't see it.

 

It's also possible that declarer didn't draw attention to the revoke. He may have noticed something amiss, called the TD, and spoken to him away from the table. 61B1 gives declarer the right to ask an opponent if he revoked, but doesn't require him to do so (and it's generally disadvantageous to do so).

[Cyberyeti]

I'm confused about the application of the laws, here. (Perhaps that is why the hand isn't in the laws forum...)

 

First, I don't think I understand why you think you are getting 2 tricks from the revoke rather than just one.

 

Second, I don't quite follow what happens if you call the TD. If it is West who has revoked, then surely it can still be corrected before it is established? Now that attention has been drawn to it, doesn't it have to be corrected? If so, then assuming the TD hasn't made a complete mess of things then I will play East for HJ since if he is the one who has revoked it is too late to correct it.

You don't get 2 tricks any more, you used to if a trick was won subsequently by a card that should have been played to the revoke trick I believe.

 

One thing I spied in the laws that I didn't know was that there is no rectification if both sides revoke on the same board. I know there's a blanket comment on deliberately infringing the laws, and also the director has discretion to adjust, but I can see a situation where once the opps have committed a 1 trick revoke, you could commit a 2 trick revoke and benefit.

[blackshoe]

You don't get 2 tricks any more, you used to if a trick was won subsequently by a card that should have been played to the revoke trick I believe.

 

One thing I spied in the laws that I didn't know was that there is no rectification if both sides revoke on the same board. I know there's a blanket comment on deliberately infringing the laws, and also the director has discretion to adjust, but I can see a situation where once the opps have committed a 1 trick revoke, you could commit a 2 trick revoke and benefit.

You get two tricks if the revoking player won the revoke trick and the revoking side later gets at least one more trick. Otherwise you get one trick, provided the offending side won either the revoke trick or a subsequent trick.

 

If there are two revokes on the same board, Law 64C will come into play. If your ploy benefits you, then the non-offending side (your opponents) is insufficiently compensated, and the TD will adjust the score. And if the TD discovers that you did it deliberately, not only will you get a PP, you may well be headed for an ethics hearing.

[Cyberyeti]

You get two tricks if the revoking player won the revoke trick and the revoking side later gets at least one more trick. Otherwise you get one trick, provided the offending side won either the revoke trick or a subsequent trick.

 

I'm aware of that, my comment was meant to read "you no longer get 2 tricks for this particular revoke ... but I think you used to if the J♥ should have dropped under your Q".

[Vampyr]

I'm aware of that, my comment was meant to read "you no longer get 2 tricks for this particular revoke ... but I think you used to if the J♥ should have dropped under your Q".

 

Provided, of course, that the J later wins a trick.

[Cyberyeti]

Provided, of course, that the J later wins a trick.

Correct, which is why had you needed to you would have taken the ruffing finesse which would become a no lose effort.