Could've been a revoke. But the players probably remember those. Just have to rule on the balance of probability what you think the likely score was I think. Worth trying a few detailed questions to see if it jogs the memory at all.
Remind the players to please be careful recording the scores.
@JamesC said:
Just have to rule on the balance of probability what you think the likely score was I think.
Sounds sensible, but where in the laws does it say I can do that?
LAW 85 - RULINGS ON DISPUTED FACTS
When the Director is called upon to rule on a point of law or
regulation in which the facts are not agreed upon, he
proceeds as follows:
A. Director’s Assessment
1. In determining the facts the Director shall base his
view on the balance of probabilities, which is to say
in accordance with the weight of the evidence he is
able to collect.
Club players always remember bidding and making slams, especially grands. They would certainly remember making a grand missing the Ace of trumps. Is it possible that the wrong suit has been entered as the contract? Or, is it possible that the board was corrupted at some some stage, so that declarer did have the Ace of trumps? In the latter case you would need to split the traveller into subfields.
Thaks for the Law reference Gordon. I don't think it's unreasonable to assume the entered score is in some way similar to what happened and I'm assuming it's possible to form some opinion as to the likely contract. It seems most probable, for example, that one side was awarded an extra trick or possibly the major suits were switched round, as Steven alludes to. I guess it's possible that the score is sufficiently strange you just have no idea what the score might be, you might decide no score is obtainable under those circumstances.
@StevenG said:
Club players always remember bidding and making slams, especially grands. They would certainly remember making a grand missing the Ace of trumps. Is it possible that the wrong suit has been entered as the contract? Or, is it possible that the board was corrupted at some some stage, so that declarer did have the Ace of trumps? In the latter case you would need to split the traveller into subfields.
I didn't say it was a grand slam, just 13 tricks taken.
Just to clarify, this has happened 3 times recently. The "13 tricks missing Ace of Trumps" was to give an example where I could be sure (other irregularities aside) that the result was not possible.
Two of them have been resolved. One was 13 tricks missing KQJ of trumps, and was online (so guaranteed no revokes / deficient tricks etc). It turned out there had been a claim where declarer intended to claim all the remaining tricks after losing the current one, but instead claimed all included the current trick. Defenders duly accepted. The other was 3NT-3 which had been put in as 3NT+3.
Comments
Do you mean the score is not possible, or you consider the result to be impossible?
The result. Think make 13 tricks missing the Ace of trumps.
It seems hard to imagine that none of four players, of whatever level, would be unable to remember how they failed to take the ace of trumps.
Could've been a revoke. But the players probably remember those. Just have to rule on the balance of probability what you think the likely score was I think. Worth trying a few detailed questions to see if it jogs the memory at all.
Remind the players to please be careful recording the scores.
You obviously don't have much experience with lower level players!
Sounds sensible, but where in the laws does it say I can do that?
Actually do the laws not treat it as result not obtainable, and hence AV-/AV- (putting in wrong result and failing to check)?
There are situations where the Ace of trumps does not take a trick - law 67 typically. Otherwise presumably Law 85.
LAW 85 - RULINGS ON DISPUTED FACTS
When the Director is called upon to rule on a point of law or
regulation in which the facts are not agreed upon, he
proceeds as follows:
A. Director’s Assessment
1. In determining the facts the Director shall base his
view on the balance of probabilities, which is to say
in accordance with the weight of the evidence he is
able to collect.
Club players always remember bidding and making slams, especially grands. They would certainly remember making a grand missing the Ace of trumps. Is it possible that the wrong suit has been entered as the contract? Or, is it possible that the board was corrupted at some some stage, so that declarer did have the Ace of trumps? In the latter case you would need to split the traveller into subfields.
Thaks for the Law reference Gordon. I don't think it's unreasonable to assume the entered score is in some way similar to what happened and I'm assuming it's possible to form some opinion as to the likely contract. It seems most probable, for example, that one side was awarded an extra trick or possibly the major suits were switched round, as Steven alludes to. I guess it's possible that the score is sufficiently strange you just have no idea what the score might be, you might decide no score is obtainable under those circumstances.
I didn't say it was a grand slam, just 13 tricks taken.
Just to clarify, this has happened 3 times recently. The "13 tricks missing Ace of Trumps" was to give an example where I could be sure (other irregularities aside) that the result was not possible.
Two of them have been resolved. One was 13 tricks missing KQJ of trumps, and was online (so guaranteed no revokes / deficient tricks etc). It turned out there had been a claim where declarer intended to claim all the remaining tricks after losing the current one, but instead claimed all included the current trick. Defenders duly accepted. The other was 3NT-3 which had been put in as 3NT+3.
It sounds like you resolved them by asking the players, which will usually be the case.