Restoring Equity after a Revoke
by David Stevenson,
Former Chief Tournament Director, Welsh Bridge Union
Liverpool, England, UK
When you revoke, sometimes the Law makes you lose no tricks, sometimes one, sometimes two, and occasionally
more. Why is this? Is it fair?
The Law on revokes tries to do two things:
1 Punish the offenders to stop them doing it again
2 Make sure that the non-offenders do not lose from the revoke (called restoring equity)
However, the aim is not to punish too harshly, so often there is no punishment on top of restoring equity.
The rules for the basic number of tricks to be transferred are (summary taken from Duplicate Bridge Rules
Simplified by John Rumbelow & David Stevenson):
PROCEDURE WHEN A REVOKE IS ESTABLISHED
How many tricks did the OFFENDING SIDE win from the revoke trick
onwards (INCLUDING the revoke trick)?
||there is no Penalty.
||PENALTY ONE TRICK transferred.
|[c] TWO or MORE:
Did the revoke card win the revoke trick?
YES: PENALTY TWO TRICKS
the OFFENDER (not his Partner) win a subsequent trick with a card that
have been legally* played to the revoke trick?
PENALTY TWO TRICKS transferred.
PENALTY ONE TRICK transferred.
Tricks are transferred as shown to the opponents at the end of the hand.
* Note: this refers to “a card that could have been LEGALLY played to the revoke trick”, not necessarily
This a lottery: sometimes the revoke makes no difference but two tricks are transferred! Best is not
to revoke, then you will not suffer!
If the revoke penalty is insufficient compensation for the non-offenders then there is RESTORING EQUITY.
Suppose 3NT was making an overtrick but it goes 3 off because a defender revokes and kills dummy's
long suit. Now the revoke cost declarer four tricks, and the Director will give those four tricks back:
he has "restored equity".
You may contact David by e-mail: email@example.com