Unshuffled boards EBU, club duplicate
#1
Posted 2014-November-27, 18:55
In the last round of tonight's duplicate at the club, one of the players noticed that two of the three boards in the round had not been shuffled and dealt (he remembered playing them the previous week). It was clearly too late to redeal them at that point and have everyone play them again. How should the boards in question be scored?
6D2 and 12C2(a) suggest to me that everyone who playeds these board should be awarded Ave+ on them (all but one pair as there was a sit-out). But it feels strange to give everyone Ave+ on a board so I wondered if this was the usual practice or if it was more normal to do something else instead, e.g. simply not score the boards at all.
#2
Posted 2014-November-27, 21:26
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
#3
Posted 2014-November-27, 21:35
blackshoe, on 2014-November-27, 21:26, said:
No, but if anyone else is still to play these boards (on another occasion) they must be redealt.
#4
Posted 2014-November-27, 23:44
Vampyr, on 2014-November-27, 21:35, said:
Of course.
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
#5
Posted 2014-November-28, 01:41
"Robin Barker is a mathematician. ... All highly skilled in their respective fields and clearly accomplished bridge players."
#6
Posted 2014-November-28, 02:37
#7
Posted 2014-November-28, 03:43
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
#8
Posted 2014-November-28, 10:32
Hence I'd do something illegal but practical: the people who played it keep their score; the people who noticed it, and their opponents, get average plus; the people who omitted to deal it get fined.
I realise, of course, that this post doesn't belong in a Laws forum.
#9
Posted 2014-November-28, 10:55
gnasher, on 2014-November-28, 10:32, said:
Hence I'd do something illegal but practical: the people who played it keep their score; the people who noticed it, and their opponents, get average plus; the people who omitted to deal it get fined.
I realise, of course, that this post doesn't belong in a Laws forum.
It seems appropriate for "simple rulings" I would probably be simple and do it, too.
#10
Posted 2014-November-28, 11:10
gnasher, on 2014-November-28, 10:32, said:
Hence I'd do something illegal but practical: the people who played it keep their score; the people who noticed it, and their opponents, get average plus; the people who omitted to deal it get fined.
I realise, of course, that this post doesn't belong in a Laws forum.
Law 6D2 said:
#11
Posted 2014-November-28, 11:35
gnasher, on 2014-November-28, 10:32, said:
aguahombre, on 2014-November-28, 10:55, said:
pran, on 2014-November-28, 11:10, said:
Sven is right. Both gnasher and agua would fail in their duty to follow the laws (Law 81B2, Law 82A).
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
#12
Posted 2014-November-28, 12:26
Quote
What's worse, it's quite likely that some pairs will have gained an advantage by being familiar with the hands, even if they didn't consciously recognize them.
What troubles me about the popular solution is that it has the effect of handicapping the pair who sat the boards out, relative to the rest of the field. My favourite law, 84D, tells me that I have to adjust the score in favour of a non-offending side which has been damaged by an irregularity for which the Laws otherwise offer no rectification. So I'm obliged to make it up to this pair somehow.
I doubt the scoring program will allow me to give them matchpoints for a board they sat out. The only way I can think of to get round this is to throw the boards out. And add a PP to the offending pair to restore its disadvantage.
#13
Posted 2014-November-28, 12:53
Aardv, on 2014-November-28, 12:26, said:
What troubles me about the popular solution is that it has the effect of handicapping the pair who sat the boards out, relative to the rest of the field. My favourite law, 84D, tells me that I have to adjust the score in favour of a non-offending side which has been damaged by an irregularity for which the Laws otherwise offer no rectification. So I'm obliged to make it up to this pair somehow.
I doubt the scoring program will allow me to give them matchpoints for a board they sat out. The only way I can think of to get round this is to throw the boards out. And add a PP to the offending pair to restore its disadvantage.
I don't understand what you are really saying here, but what is clear is that no result may stand at any table on such boards. However, the Director should award PP to any contestant who is proven guilty of an irregularity resulting in such cancellation of board(s).
#14
Posted 2014-November-28, 13:31
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
#15
Posted 2014-November-28, 13:53
blackshoe, on 2014-November-28, 11:35, said:
I think we both knew that.
#16
Posted 2014-November-28, 14:03
aguahombre, on 2014-November-28, 13:53, said:
But Dick Jones, who just got his director's card yesterday, and is reading this thread, doesn't.
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
#17
Posted 2014-November-28, 16:30
Aardv, on 2014-November-28, 12:26, said:
If you really wanted to give them something, you could find a board on which they scored close to their session score and change their score to A+. This is not legal, of course.
But it's not something to worry too much about at a club game anyway. What are the prizes, something like $20-30 divided between four pairs? That is all that is at stake, unless this session is part of a series, eg a ladder.
Now what would you do if the sit-out pair were one of the pairs that dealt the board before the tables were counted and they became a rover, or whatever?
#18
Posted 2014-November-29, 18:02
blackshoe, on 2014-November-28, 14:03, said:
You mean he got his director's card without being able to read? I did day that my "ruling" was illegal and didn't belong in this forum. How much clearer should I have made it?
#19
Posted 2014-November-29, 18:29
I know some very experienced TDs who think they can make any ruling they want. In fact, some years ago I had one tell me that in just those words. We don't want to give the impression here that that is a valid approach.
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean