The sun., 1916-12-24
REVOKE PENALTIES
At AUCTION BRIDGE
The Present System Unjust. a,
Examples From Actual
Play Will Show.
By r. r. FOSTER.

Tho Portland Club laws FOR wis.
were frst published IN 1856. b. "Caelebs
tE. A. Carlyon) and they fixed the r..
woke penalty at three actual tricks Or
their value IN the score. This penal,y
was predicated on tho presumption ,ha,
one would revoke on purpose II the On.
portunity offered when opposed 70 IN.
observant adversar!es, and We npd both
Carlyon and Deschapelles insisting ,ha,
" ono made n revoke inadver,en.,v q
was perfectly proper TO make another -
conceal the first.
II must be admitted by any one VIII
Is AZ AL familiar with modern carl
players that such a thing as an in,.r
tioDal revoke 10 absolutely unheard O,
There arc three contributing causes for
revokes. The first and most prolific 4.
having too vivid an Imagination. IN.
player follows suit to his thoughts n.
stead Of 70 the actual card.
Another fruitful source Of revokss I,
carelesaness In sorting tho hand, A
third 10 having two cards slightly stuct
together and not discovering the fsc,
until one 10 apparently a card shor,
All three Of these revokes arc drsah.u'
crimes. being still on all fours with N.
Intentional revokes Of the last cer.ur,
~ far as punishment goes.
Tho present laws of auction aay ,ha.
the proper punishment for any OF IVES.
three very human mistakes should h.
loO points. or three actual trick. ,ba
top value OF which would he 30 point, g.
normal play with 1875 equity In a gan
Accidentally IT might he the r,ihhe
game. Then II would be ESQ. This h..
gins to look a bit like a sliding scale. H.
actual practice III" evoke may cos, .ro,.
100 points TO 1000, and the writer on,
saw a hand. TO be cited preseu.,v =,
wnlcn a revoke would have cos, a..
mad IL been detected. although 4, mad.
NOT the slightest difference IN the pl,y
How the original value Of three trio .
was arrived at 1t il impossible even "a
guess. Perhaps they guessed n, 4, vbet
,hey made the Law. II a record wore
kept or the difference a thousand r,,,
Tess revokers make in the resul, ~, ,
thousand hands n Is a safe no, IN. D..
would not he 5000 tricks. womb d..
Two 10 n against its being 1000
me whist players cut Il To two ,r,c,,
me bridge payers went back to tb,e.
80 ~ op'ion on score points n.
auc.Ion players Kept IL at three. but W..
,aeH 10 the points. $50. After a year ..
Two 'hey cut the points tn 100. hu. ,.o
the tricks al three. The idea v,. 81
II the declarer took the tricks. ,hey a..
not worth more than 10 each. Thev ~
koe the 10 equity for the game r.
trIcks were never worth NOR. ,bo, Z
to he adversaries. '
This arrangement leads a. som.
Gus results. The basis o. c,I,ur
seems 20 he three actual trlr',s Y- -.
value Of two tricks In points. "a 4, a o.,
contract Is always worth 80 "A trict uy
inc tr'ck, are sometimes worth goo @,
10 tie a~dve'saries. Yet tie revoEe !. r
atty STAYS at so.
To make this poin. clear. as Z. i4 lr
nor'nnt. let US look at two situate.
Y and Y play a no m aga, ,
and X. The declarer makes two odA
evokes. He cannot score his two trick
ana his opponents score 100. Tbs = ID
y should be. That Is the normal va DE-,
nNed by the laws for a revoke. B.' o..
suppose 4 had made six hy carl &"
adversar'es take their 100 IN p.rt
and n scores nothing for tho sou- -
he made over what the laws SGT
penalty for the revoke. That IS. he u,
10 In tricks and 30 for the litt,r
besides the 100 scored against him
a slip due To carelessness has cost
actually 1870. although the laws SAL
penalty IL only 100.
A step further. The contract or
rubber game is five spades double ".
declorer's hand could never have u
more than two by cards by am n.tI ,
OF play. = that H. what he dii rra ,
but he detects a revoke. F. 'rls
takes three actual tricks. fu,n,s lt. r.
tract and wins the rubber Thai ',
points won instead Of 500 lus' T, -
to say the evoke cost his atv"'-7r..
$40, although its legal value Is o., 'N.
At the Knickerbocker Wh.s' Club -r
behind Il player who thought he N, o.
| hand