The next County Committee Meeting will be held,Wednesday 1 May 2019 at 7:00 pm in Nottingham Bridge Club.
Team Captains are invited to email match results to the appropriate League Secretary Jane Hall for Team of 8 results and
for Team of 4 results
I have amended some of these examples slightly from the example at the workshop.
Exposed card seen by all before board played. Card falls from board as passed between tables.
Director called before bidding starts.
If no one has counted their cards then the Director may replace the card into the correct hand. Everyone knows that thier is a King of X in a pack of cards, so no advantange gained.
If a player has counted their cards and discovered a card short
Law 14. The board can be played but director may need to award an adjusted score.
Law 16D Players have to be warned they have unauthorised information.
Director may need to award an adjusted score.
During the play of a hand one of the players discovers they only have 12 cards. This card is discovered under the score card on another table. The missing card is a trump.
Any board that can be played in a suit contract is suitable here.
Law 7B-2 Each player counts his cards face down to be sure he has exactly 13..............
Law 14B-2 says the card is restored to the hand, however the hand may not be playable there could have been a revoke. Rectification and penalties may apply.
North opens the bidding with 1♠ East passes South bids 1♠ as he has not seen his partners bid when he notices he corrects to 2NT West doubles and then North bids 4♠ at which point the director is called.
East/West have called the director because they say that North cannot bid again after the insufficient bid by his partner was not made good.
North/South say that south has made a comparable call by bidding 2NT as they play Jacoby.
Law 27 A1 West may accept the call of 1♠
Law 23 says that South can substitute a comparable call. Suggest that director should have been called at the beginning of the sequence. Director needs to decide whether to allow the Jacoby bid is it a comparable call.
I believe 2NT is a comparable call, a Jacoby 2NT shows a good raise to 3♠. Not 100% perfect, but near close enugh that I would accept as a comparable call.
Does West have a bid he can make over 2NT.
N/S are in a contract played by South but North mishears the card to be played on West’s lead of K♠ and south does not notice until after East has played his card. South calls the director.
South believes he can replace the card played from dummy even if East has played his card.
We can use any board where N/S are in a contract.
Law 45D says the declarer can have the card replaced then East can with draw his card. Director must explain about unauthorised information Law 16 C director may need to adjust the score.
Law 16C1 East card is authorised for East West 16C2 says it is unauthorised information for declarer then 16C3 may be needed for adjusted score.
East opens the bidding with 1NT and his partner goes to transfer by calling 2♥ before south has had a chance to bid.
Director is called by South to wishes to bid his long club suit.
The meaning of 2♥ was explained as a transfer.
The auction continues
W N E S
2♠ Pass 4♠
Law 10 C1. The director must explain all the options before asking if North wants to accept 2♥
Law 29 A. North may accept the bid out of rotation
Law 29 C. Since 2♥ is a transfer any penalties relate to spades, rather than ♥
Director can allow South to make a natural bid of 2 ♣
Law 31 A2 West can bid 2♠ this is a comparable call note if West can still make a transfer over an intervention then he can still bid 2♥ if he does not make a comparable bid the East must pass.
Law 26 A1 Lead penalties apply to spades but since West made a comparable call there are no lead restrictions.
East is playing a contract and he has not yet drawn trumps. A card is ruffed by both sides and then it is discovered that both sides have revoked.
Law 62 C3 If both sides revoke on the same trick and only one side has played to the subsequent trick, then both revokes must be corrected (see Law 16C2). Every card withdrawn by the defending side becomes a penalty card.
North opens 2NT (they are playing the unusual 2 NT opening) his partner announces this as 20-22 and on his turn bids 3♦ . North takes this as suit preference and leaves his partner in this contract. Once the hand has been played East West realise they have game on their way and have been misled. They director is called.
West calls the Director at the end of the auction and wants their bid back. West says they passed because they knew North would bid 3♥ and would get another chance to bid.
Result 3♦ +2 to NS
Law 20 F6 If the Director judges that a player has based an action on misinformation given to him by an opponent see, as appropriate, Law 21 or Law 47E.
See Laws 21 and 47
I would poll players for a likely result.
West is unlikely to Pass, likely result is to adjust the score to a slam going off.