Revoke

[euclidz]

West is declarer playing 4♠. Dummy's had K Q x x x ♥. South plays a low ♥ West discards a low ♣ and North wins the trick with A♥. Two tricks later West finds a low ♥in her hand (revoke). West then plays the ♥ to dummy's K and Q♥ i.e. the revoke ♥ left her with a ♥ to lead to dummy's winning ♥'s. What should the ruling have been?

[steve2005]

North South get the higher of:

1) the actual result with a 1 trick penalty or

2) the likely result (with any dubious decision decided in NS's favour) if west follows with the heart.

 

Note: NS is not entitled to 2) plus a 1 trick penalty.

[euclidz]

Thanks . . . I know the standard revoke penalties, my question here relates specifically to the advantage gained by West. If West had not revoked and had played her single ♥ then she would not have had a ♥ to lead to dummy i.e. surely it can't be right that 'revoker' can gain a benefit/advantage from her revoke

[gordontd]

surely it can't be right that 'revoker' can gain a benefit/advantage from her revoke

It can't be right and it isn't so.

[blackshoe]

Law 64C. Redress of Damage

1. When, after any established revoke, including those not subject to trick adjustment, the Director deems that the non-offending side is insufficiently compensated by this Law for the damage caused, he shall assign an adjusted score.

…

[steve2005]

Thanks . . . I know the standard revoke penalties, my question here relates specifically to the advantage gained by West. If West had not revoked and had played her single ♥ then she would not have had a ♥ to lead to dummy i.e. surely it can't be right that 'revoker' can gain a benefit/advantage from her revoke

it isn't a set penalty. you have to figure out what the result was if they had followed suit.

You get only the proper result not an additional penalty.

 

you didnt give full hand so only you can figure out the just result.