October 2017 - 36

Ruling the Game
rulings@acbl.org
MODERATOR: MATT SMITH
NATIONAL TOURNAMENT DIRECTOR

The Laws of Duplicate Bridge 2017
are now in effect. This article and ones
to follow highlight changes made that
will be important for club directors and
players to know.
The ACBL has received several
emails in response to the July Ruling
the Game article on the new laws regarding the requirement that the board
remain in the center of the table, correctly oriented, until play is completed
(Law 7A). Concern has been expressed
that this will make it difficult for many
with vision disabilities to play. This
law is intended to prevent boards from
being fouled by having cards mixed or
hands returned to incorrect slots, but
certainly reasonable accommodations
should always be made to allow those
with disabilities to play. If a player
needs the board to be moved to the
side or even off the table to be able to
see the cards, it should, of course, be
permitted as long as care is exercised
to ensure that the board is not fouled.
Law 26 Call Withdrawn, Lead
Restrictions. This law has been
revamped from the previous version
and is now simpler. It does not apply
in cases where a comparable call has
been made or where a call is changed
due to it being unintended (see previous articles in this series). When a
player withdraws a call and replaces it
with another to correct an irregularity and he later becomes a defender,
declarer may choose one suit that was
not specified in the legal auction by the
offender and prohibit his partner from

36 Bridge Bulletin October 2017

leading that suit the first time he obtains the lead (including opening lead).
Such a prohibition continues for as
long as partner retains the lead. There
are no longer any cases where declarer
will have the option to require the
lead of a particular suit. For example,
suppose a player makes an insufficient
1♥ bid over a 1♠ bid and replaces it
with a pass and does not bid later in the
auction. If the offending side is later on
defense, declarer may choose any one
suit at offender's partner's first turn
to lead and forbid him from leading
that suit while he holds the lead. If,
however, offender in the legal auction
later raised partner's club bid, clubs
would be exempt from the list of suits
declarer could choose. Note that in all
cases where a call is changed to something other than a comparable call, the
partner has unauthorized information
throughout the deal that may restrict
his legal choices.
Law 27 Insufficient Bid. The
wording of the new law has been
changed to incorporate Law 23's concept of "comparable call" rather than
the current law's wording of "the same
meaning as or a more precise meaning
than the insufficient bid." The wording
has also been changed in 27B1(a) to allow penalty-free corrections of insufficient bids at the lowest sufficient level
as long as both calls specify the same
suit or suits (even if the suit bid insufficiently is different from the sufficient
call). This continues and extends the
philosophy of the laws that as long as
essentially the same information is

available from either call, it is desirable
to achieve a normal bridge result. So
for example, in an auction of 1NT-2♠
(overcall)-2♦, where 2♦ is intended
as a transfer to hearts, 2♦ may be corrected to a natural 3♥ without penalty.
Law 30 Pass out of Rotation, Law
31 Bid out of Rotation, and Law 32
Double or Redouble out of Rotation. These laws have all incorporated
the previously discussed concept of
comparable call found in the new Law
23. There are significant changes here
that will require study. Note particularly that even when some out-of-turn
bids, doubles and redoubles are not
corrected by a comparable call, offender's partner is no longer automatically
required to pass throughout the entire
auction. When a comparable call is
chosen under these laws, the offender's
partner is not barred at all. As always,
keep in mind Law 23C in all cases
where a comparable call is permitted
under these three laws or the insufficient bid law. It states that if "the Director judges at the end of the play that
without the assistance gained through
the infraction the outcome of the board
could well have been different, and in
consequence the non-offending side is
damaged, he shall award an adjusted
score." If at the end of the deal it seems
that something unexpected did occur
after permitting a comparable call to
be made that gave the offending side
an advantage, the director still has the
right to revisit the situation and make
an adjusted score.
Law 43 Dummy's Limitations.
Dummy may no longer look at a defender's hand, even if it is not at his own
initiative. He will now simply not be
allowed to look, and defender may no
longer show dummy his hand. As well,
if dummy has violated his limitations
described in this law and he is the first
to draw attention to a defender's irregularity, the declaring side will keep the
score achieved at the table even though
by use of a split score the defending
side will have its score adjusted if it
gained through the irregularity.
◾

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of October 2017