开云体育

I've asked Don to see if he could check with anyone to see whether one pair should be given an average-minus instead of their normal result (which was lower) on a board which produced a strange irregularity. After passing out, one table discovered that dealer had passed with the cards he'd just held on the previous board and that he had not taken out the correct hand. The correct hand contained 19 HCP. Had the error been discovered while the auction was still alive, the call with the wrong cards would have been canceled. It might have been possible to play the hand normally, as the altered auction might not have conveyed anything pertinent to the offending side. However, in this situation the irregularity was not discovered until the hand was technically over. It is possible that the offending side should have been given an average-minus and the non-offenders average-plus instead of keeping the passout.

As I was typing this, Don responded that I should forward the question to Marilyn Wells, who is often in charge of our STaC games. Stay tuned for developments.

Update - I misread the section; the only way it would have been possible to play the board normally had the irregularity been discovered in time would have been if the canceled call were repeated. But I have still checked to see whether the passout should have stood or whether the pairs should have been given average-minus/average-plus (or better had the non-offending side scored over 60% overall). This will not affect masterpoints in our game, but may affect the overall.