Home EBU TDs

Displaying Dummy in an unusual manner

I never cease to be amazed as to the ability of players to come up with new situations to test the laws.

Here, Dummy laid out his hand by first putting the lowest denomination card in each suit on the table and placing the other cards in ascending order from this bottom card. Correctly the highest denomination card was at the top of each suit, but (other than the top card) the players can only see the bottom part of the cards, not (as is usual) the top.

Can players insist that dummy be displayed in the more usual manner? Laws 41D and WB 8.41 make no comment on it.

Comments

  • edited June 2023

    If other players object, the director should instruct dummy to display his hand in the usual way. Not just this hand but throughout the event.

  • @Robin_BarkerTD said:
    If other players object, the director should instruct dummy to display his hand in the usual way. Not just this hand but throughout the event.

    On what basis? Where in the laws / guidelines does it say (or even suggest) the director can enforce this?

    For the record, this was a real situation and the player refused to change them.

  • edited June 2023

    Did you penalize them?

    LAW 90 - PROCEDURAL PENALTIES
    B. Offences Subject to Procedural Penalty
    The following are examples of offences subject to procedural penalty (but the offences are not limited to these):
    8. failure to comply promptly with tournament regulations or with instructions of the Director.

  • @JeremyChild said:

    @Robin_BarkerTD said:
    If other players object, the director should instruct dummy to display his hand in the usual way. Not just this hand but throughout the event.

    On what basis? Where in the laws / guidelines does it say (or even suggest) the director can enforce this?

    That it is the tournament director's job to have the game run as the players expect, and it is a reasonable instruction for the director to require uniformity of procedures in their game, even if the laws do not specify this procedure.

  • @Robin_BarkerTD said:
    Did you penalize them?

    LAW 90 - PROCEDURAL PENALTIES
    B. Offences Subject to Procedural Penalty
    The following are examples of offences subject to procedural penalty (but the offences are not limited to these):
    8. failure to comply promptly with tournament regulations or with instructions of the Director.

    I wasn't directing (or even there) - this was brought to me by a club member.

  • @Robin_BarkerTD said:

    @JeremyChild said:

    @Robin_BarkerTD said:
    If other players object, the director should instruct dummy to display his hand in the usual way. Not just this hand but throughout the event.

    On what basis? Where in the laws / guidelines does it say (or even suggest) the director can enforce this?

    That it is the tournament director's job to have the game run as the players expect, and it is a reasonable instruction for the director to require uniformity of procedures in their game, even if the laws do not specify this procedure.

    It doesn't say that anywhere in the laws that I can see.

    As directors we get our authority from the laws (and the associated guidance). We can use our judgement in applying the laws but we can't just make stuff up because we don't like what's happening.

    OK this is a clear case where we all know this shouldn't be allowed, but not all incidents are so clear cut.

    We do have in LAW 90 A:
    The Director, in addition to implementing the rectifications in these Laws, may also assess procedural penalties for any offence that unduly delays or obstructs the game, inconveniences other contestants, violates correct procedure, or requires the award of an adjusted score.

    It clearly inconveniences other contestants because it makes the cards harder to identify. So the director can assess a procedural penalty even though the action in question isn't specifically banned by the laws.

    Does this mean the director can insist the cards are displyed "properly"? It doesn't say that, and whilst it would be a reasonable inference, we must be careful of over-reach. We abuse the laws at our peril.

    Of course we could just keep giving PPs!

  • I think the player should have called the director. I am not surprised that dummy did not comply with instructions from a player.

    We used to talk of "custom and practice" - the way things have always been done. Clubs and directors can insist that "custom and practice" be maintained unless it is in conflict with the laws, and can make local regulations to enact local custom and practice.

  • I'm a little surprised that declarer tolerates such a dummy display. If I understand the Opening Post correctly, declarer is looking at all the suit symbols and designations upside down.

    Barrie Partridge - CTD for Bridge Club Live

  • edited June 2023

    @Senior_Kibitzer said:
    I'm a little surprised that declarer tolerates such a dummy display. If I understand the Opening Post correctly, declarer is looking at all the suit symbols and designations upside down.

    Except Diamonds :-o

Sign In or Register to comment.