Boards played in wrong direction.
In a standard 7 and half table Hesitation Mitchell with a last round arrow switch on all tables except table 8. If a table only remembers the arrow switch after playing the first board of the last round how should that board be scored? Is it a fouled board?.
Comments
It isn't a fouled board, you score it as played. Usually this just involves switching the appropriate pair numbers in the scoring program.
Peter
Bridgemate has an Arrow Switch option when making manual adjustments. This works even in a straight Mitchell when NS and EW pairs have the same numbers.
Alan
Hi Sorry to be a pain but for instance board wasn't arrow switched so played by original North (who should have been West) resulting in 4NT+1N. So arrow switching in EBU Score changes the N/S & E/W pair numbers and retains the score awarded to North (who didn't actually play the board).
I don't understand how what you are saying differs from arrow switching.
Alan
Basically think I'm just seeking confirmation that the score achieved by North, even though it was played by a N/S pairing that due to the arrow switch should have been E/W applies.
Whenever pairs fail to play a board in the orientation intended for that round, they nevertheless keep the score they actually achieved.
And the EBU are very tolerant when it happens.
We might be less tolerant if we thought anyone was doing it deliberately, though it's hard to see how they could get an advantage from doing so!
'Extraneous information from other sources?'. if the cards lie your way then at least you have a chance of playing in the right contract - which will usually get 60%+ - if the cards lie the other way and the opponents get to the right contract (and of course there is nothing you can do about it), then you are getting 40% or so. So if you see that NS are playing the hand then the probability is that you, too, should play the hand.
To be honest, weejonnie, I think that is rubbish. You win more points with good defence and my style is to bid more than other people on bad hands.
Of course, you could say that whether it is true or not, if players believe it is true, they could be trying this.
There is no real point in overthinking possible cheating. Worry about it in obvious situations only.
Even if it is rubbish - the fact that you know which-way the hand will be played gives you the option of increasing the probability of being declarer or defender. No doubt you would elect to defend, given the choice. (Not that I am saying you would ever take advantage of such UI)
I've seen TDs adjust the scoring program, such that the players retain their scores. I've seen TDs give 40-40 for messing things up by not arrow-switching, or even 50-50 or 60-60, I've seen all of these. Is there a clear guidance as to what is "right"?
Yes - the guidance I gave in my first response above! The conditions for awarding an artificial score under Law 12C2 have not been met.
The law says that the players should get scored for the results they obtained whenever possible. For a failure to arrow-switch in a one-winner movement it is always possible to keep the score on the board. For an unnecessary arrow-switch in two-winner movement it is not possible to keep the score; Law 12C2 applies: 40/40 seems appropriate.
If the failure to arrow-switch was deliberate (pigheadedness or some notion that NS get the better cards) then a procedural penalty can be imposed (to one or both pairs); escalating for repeat offences.
Thank you, both.
Hi All
Apologies for resurrecting this again but
What's the difference in my original question to that stated in the White Book Law 87 Fouled Board?
A fouled board is one where it is played in a different form at one or more tables to the rest of the field. That's not the case here: it was played in the same form, but with the pairs in different directions to that originally intended. It can be scored perfectly well without being treated as a fouled board.