[Phil]

---

The final contract was 2N x'd by East failing by one trick. After the hand, the players discovered North had 12 and East had 14. The hand record showed the ♥J belonged in the North hand.

Per 13C, I canceled the result, and determined what made what I thought was an appropriate adjusted score.

On the actual hand, NS got active on defense and took the first six tricks: 3♠ + 1♥ + 2♣. Assuming East does not throw away any winners on the first six tricks, East makes the balance: 1♠ + 2♥ + 3♦ + 1♣, so I ruled result stands (plus a PP for both NS and EW for not counting their cards). The ♥J was not material.

Anything to concern myself with here?

[bluejak]

Since no result can be obtained should not the adjustment be Ave-/Ave-?

[Phil]

bluejak, on Aug 15 2010, 05:34 PM, said:

Since no result can be obtained should not the adjustment be Ave-/Ave-?

Well, this is the question. It seemed the ♥J didn't affect matters, and if the director is just to give A-'s around, why wouldn't the rules indicate that?

[pran]

[Phil]

ACBL, on Duplicate Decisions, said:

13
Incorrect Number of Cards

NOTE: Law 13 applies when 52 cards are distributed unevenly among the four hands. When the board contains fewer than 52 cards, Law 14 applies. If the incorrect number of cards is discovered before a player with an incorrect number of cards has made a call, and no player will then have seen a card belonging to another player’s hand, the Director shall correct the discrepancy and require the board to be played normally. The Director should consult with players who have
previously played the board or consult with hand records, if available, in order to restore the board to its proper state. If the Director discovers that the board was incorrectly dealt, he shall order the board redealt and cancel any previous results on the board.

When one or more of the players with an incorrect number of cards makes a call on the board, and the Director determines that the deal can be corrected and played normally with no change of call, the deal should be played. Player concurrence is no longer required. The Director may still choose to award an adjusted score if he later
decides that the card(s) in question did indeed affect the result obtained. When the Director determines that one or more pockets of a board contain an incorrect number of cards, the cards must be restored to the proper hands before the auction may begin.

When a player has seen one or more cards belonging to another player’s hand, the Director must:

1. decide whether the information is consequential and whether it would interfere with normal bidding and play. If the Director decides the board can be played without prejudice, he shall allow the board to be played, obtaining a true bridge result. Again, this Law no longer needs the concurrence of the contestants.

2. decide if the information will interfere with the normal bidding and play, and award an artificial adjusted score (see Law 12). He may also elect to penalize an offender under Law 90.

Surplus cards are removed, though if found among quitted tricks an adjusted score may be awarded.

[pran]

Phil, on Aug 15 2010, 11:51 PM, said:

ACBL, on Duplicate Decisions, said:

13
Incorrect Number of Cards

NOTE: Law 13 applies when 52 cards are distributed unevenly among the four hands. When the board contains fewer than 52 cards, Law 14 applies. If the incorrect number of cards is discovered before a player with an incorrect number of cards has made a call, and no player will then have seen a card belonging to another player’s hand, the Director shall correct the discrepancy and require the board to be played normally. The Director should consult with players who have
previously played the board or consult with hand records, if available, in order to restore the board to its proper state. If the Director discovers that the board was incorrectly dealt, he shall order the board redealt and cancel any previous results on the board.

When one or more of the players with an incorrect number of cards makes a call on the board, and the Director determines that the deal can be corrected and played normally with no change of call, the deal should be played. Player concurrence is no longer required. The Director may still choose to award an adjusted score if he later
decides that the card(s) in question did indeed affect the result obtained. When the Director determines that one or more pockets of a board contain an incorrect number of cards, the cards must be restored to the proper hands before the auction may begin.

When a player has seen one or more cards belonging to another player’s hand, the Director must:

1. decide whether the information is consequential and whether it would interfere with normal bidding and play. If the Director decides the board can be played without prejudice, he shall allow the board to be played, obtaining a true bridge result. Again, this Law no longer needs the concurrence of the contestants.

2. decide if the information will interfere with the normal bidding and play, and award an artificial adjusted score (see Law 12). He may also elect to penalize an offender under Law 90.

Surplus cards are removed, though if found among quitted tricks an adjusted score may be awarded.

You had better quote the valid law rather than a misleading guide.

The specified procedure is directly in conflict with Law 13C which applies when the error is discovered after play has been completed.

[bluejak]

Phil, on Aug 15 2010, 11:39 PM, said:

bluejak, on Aug 15 2010, 05:34 PM, said:

Since no result can be obtained should not the adjustment be Ave-/Ave-?

Well, this is the question. It seemed the ♥J didn't affect matters, and if the director is just to give A-'s around, why wouldn't the rules indicate that?

Well, now there are several answers to that.

First, they do.

Second, if you mean why are the Laws written in such a way that you go in a general route rather than always repeating bits of that general route so as to avoid going from Law to Law then first that is the way the lawmakers decided and second the Law book would be far, far longer and more complex and far, far less readable in general than now [though it might be easier in particular areas].

Third, you have no idea whether moving a card affects matters.

[axman]

Phil, on Aug 15 2010, 05:19 PM, said:

---

The final contract was 2N x'd by East failing by one trick. After the hand, the players discovered North had 12 and East had 14. The hand record showed the ♥J belonged in the North hand.

Per 13C, I canceled the result, and determined what made what I thought was an appropriate adjusted score.

On the actual hand, NS got active on defense and took the first six tricks: 3♠ + 1♥ + 2♣. Assuming East does not throw away any winners on the first six tricks, East makes the balance: 1♠ + 2♥ + 3♦ + 1♣, so I ruled result stands (plus a PP for both NS and EW for not counting their cards). The ♥J was not material.

Anything to concern myself with here?

The score should be artificial [Av-, Av-]

L12A2. The Director awards an artificial adjusted score if no rectification can be made that will permit normal play of the board (see C2 below).