contract bridge rule question

[rapmarks]

I made an egregious error the other day at bridge, but am unsure of the penalty.

I neglected to play to the first trick. i was declarer at 4 hearts, made 5 hearts, and was ready to concede the last trick when I discovered I was the only person with a card left. I hadn't played a club on dummy's Ace of clubs on ;the first trick.

The rule book says if yiu have played to the next trick, the trick stands as played and the hand with too many cards forthwith faces and adds to the defective trick a card it could properly have played to it.

At first it was decided it was a one trick penalty.

After we had left the table it was decided that i had incurred a two stroke penalty for this infraction. The rule (I am using an old Goren Bridge book) says nothing about a penalty.

I have played a lot of bridge and have never done anything so stupid nor seen anyone else do it, so noone knew the rule.

anyone know the rule and if not, how would you interpret what it said in Goren?

 

[Makai Guy]

... it was decided that i had incurred a two stroke penalty ...

There's your problem. You were thinking about your golf game instead of your bridge game.

 

[Dave M]

Yes, it's probably a "two stroke" (two trick) penalty.

The laws define a revoke as any situation where a player doesn't follow suit, if he is able. That includes failing to play a card to the trick. Assuming your side won the trick where you failed to play a card, that trick and one other (assuming you won at least one other trick) gets transferred to the opposing side - a total of two tricks.

If your side didn't win the trick where you failed to play a card, then one later trick that you won is transferred to the other side.

However, if it was dummy that failed to play a card to the trick, there is no penalty, because all four players are respo0nsible for ensuring that dummy follows suit.

Finally, if the other side can show that the penalty is insufficient to get the adjusted score to at least what the other side would have earned had there been no revoke, the score should be adjusted equitably.

The laws as they relate to revokes were changed a bit this year, as of September 8, 2008. The above reflects the new rules.

 

[rapmarks]

thanks Dave, I thought there had to be a penalty.
and I guess I must be thinking about golf, I sure was thinking about something else when i did it.
what makes me mad is the one opponent saw me do it and didn't say a word. As soon as we finished, she said you didn't play to the first trick. This could evolve into a whole new bridge strategy.

 

[lvhmbh]

Sorry but it isn't the opponents job to tell you - it is the dummies (your partner's) job! Used to play alot of duplicate and DH plays tournament duplicate and I doubt they would tell anyone either. Sounds harsh but everyone is playing for masterpoints and to win. I used to play "kitchen" bridge for money and wouldn't have said anything there either

 

[Texasbelle]

I don't think I have ever seen one of the players fail to play a card on the first trick. I'm impressed with the use of the word "egregious." Much would depend on the type of bridge--duplicate, progressive, rubber. Each kind is interesting. The funniest error is when one trumps in and promptly leads the suit trumped, which actually happens fairly often. Anyhow, wish you many grand slams and no more under par performances!

 

[rapmarks]

Hard to believe

the same thing happened yesterday at the adjoining table.
Down to three cards in the declarer's hand, and two in each of the other hands.
the oppponents said, you made your contract, just record your score and forget about it.

 

[Art]

I happen to be a certified director, and it would be a nightmare to apply the rules to this one. Dave has correctly stated the rules with respect to penalties. The problem is how to apply them.

My approach as a director would be to go to the basic principle that the task at hand is to "restore equity" rather than apply penalties. In this case, I would check the other results (assuming it was a duplicate game) and determine what the "par" result was for a 4 heart contract and set that as the result for the table in question. However, the offender wouldn't be totally off the hook, I'd probably assess him a 1/4 board procedural penalty; that way the non-offending side would neither benefit nor suffer from the error.

Incidentally, while all players at the table have a responsibility for dummy, the declarer has the ultimate responsibility if there is an a dummy error such as the OP described. This has been stated in writing by Mike Flader, who is an Association National Tournament Director of the ACBL.

Art

 

[rapmarks]

not a duplicate game, just ladies contract bridge with a lot of elderly ladies, which I am reluctantly begining to resemble. Lots of ladies who cannot hear or see too well and lots of exceptions are made.

The hand I played had 5 hearts cold, no problem at all and I was playing it too quickly. not playing to the firt trick just gave me one less discard, did not change the play of the hand, I had plenty of entries and only the two losers.

the funny thing is that the lady in the second occurance who said no penalty is known as Evil Sue and takes great delight in scaring other people on the golf course. I know people who are petrified of her, but she is actually just a great kidder.