eagles123 Posted January 4, 2016 Report Share Posted January 4, 2016 [hv=pc=n&s=s9h2dq9865ckqt984&w=sq753h4dat432cj62&n=skt42hkqj9753djc7&e=saj86hat86dk7ca53&d=e&v=0&b=14&a=1h2cp2np3cppp]399|300[/hv] Matchpoints - I am South. the lead is the 4 of hearts to king Ace 2. At the speed of light the 6 of hearts comes back and I discard the 9 of spades on which west plays the Q of spades... however my partner has layed out the dummy wrong and has spades on the left then diamond then club then hearts. They just had the auction like 2 seconds earlier but they wanted a ruling. the contract went 2 down which was like a 70% board and it was ajusted to 3 down which was like 30% or something... I just felt a bit meh about it, from the 2nd heart its clear they arent the greatest players in the world and even if she did trump it she might well have cashed the ace of diamond or something. I can't say I really care but interested in thoughts :) Eagles Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfi Posted January 5, 2016 Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 If dummy puts the hand down incorrectly and declarer doesn't correct the irregularity I don't really see how the declaring side has any cause for complaint. I'd accept the ruling and move on. A quick look through the rule book gives me Law 12A1 or Law 23 as a basis for adjustment. I may be missing something though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sanst Posted January 5, 2016 Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 What has the speed of light to do with it? N made a mistake when laying down his cards and neither N nor S corrected it. It's a clear cut 23 case. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
campboy Posted January 5, 2016 Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 I agree with the other replies. It's perhaps worth mentioning that putting trumps on the left is a legal requirement, not just a custom (law 41D). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackshoe Posted January 5, 2016 Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 It's the legal requirement that makes it a law 23 case. If the placement of trumps were just custom, rather than law, then not placing to dummy's right would not be an irregularity, and law 23 would not apply. 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.