Changes in the new Laws affecting Directors

ALTRINCHAM BRIDGE CLUB. OCTOBER 2008

(extracted from the EBU site

12C1(c)	The concept of ‘weighted’ adjusted scores becomes the norm in England. It has been in place since 2000 as an option but it now replaces the current law 12C2. 12C1(e) does not apply in England. .
25B	In the current (1997) code there is a little known law that allows you to make a call and then ‘change your mind’. It was quite a well kept secret and had a strange penalty where you could play for at most 40% after you had done it. In the new laws that has gone. You can still make a ‘mechanical error’ and be allowed to change it (L25A) but you cannot change your mind. By and large a bid made cannot be changed.
27	This is both complicated to explain and understand and may be difficult to apply. There is a significant change to the insufficient bid law. The scope for allowing an insufficient bid (IB) to be replaced without silencing partner has been extended. The old rule of replacing it at the lowest legal level remains, provided that both bids (the IB and replacement bid) are natural. But there is now an added possibility, which comes if a replacement call can be found which has the same meaning, or a more precise meaning as the IB itself.
40	This law confirms a number of things already in EBU regulations. It also confirms that you cannot have any aide-memoires or aids to calculation. So you cannot, for example, during the play take out the bidding card to see what 4xx + 2 will score for you.
61B3	There is a consequence of defenders asking each other. If the defender has revoked, it is NOT established. The card played in error is withdrawn and becomes a major penalty card (see law 50) and the offender substitues a legal card. Cards played after the revoke but before the correction may be changed (see Law 62C). Note that if the defenders ask each other and the answer is 'no revoke' there is risk of unauthorised information.
64	The criteria for transferring tricks after an established revoke is changed. The TD no longer has to look at whether ‘an additional trick was won by the offending player with a card that could legally have been played to the revoke trick’. So the TD will look proceed as follows: Did the revoking side win any tricks after the revoke? If yes, then one trick is transferred. Did the revoker additionally win the revoke trick (you can only do this by trumping) - if so then another trick is transferred. So the penalty could be two tricks, one trick or no tricks. You can only transfer tricks won after the revoke. In case the non-offending side loses out the TD looks to see whether equity has been served. It always was the case, but it is now even more important that the TD considers it.
70	The claim laws acknowledge that, even though play should cease after a claim, it often does not and the TD is given help on how to proceed.
70, 71	The claim and concession laws still refer to action that would be careless or inferior for the class of player involved, but the bit about being ‘irrational’ has been removed.