[blackshoe]

Under what circumstances, and using what law(s), is a director justified in stopping players from completing a hand after they've started it and before they've finished it? You can assume that there's a clock, and that the clock program announced "do not start any new boards" after they started the board.

[axman]

 blackshoe, on 2015-April-08, 13:49, said:

Under what circumstances, and using what law(s), is a director justified in stopping players from completing a hand after they've started it and before they've finished it? You can assume that there's a clock, and that the clock program announced "do not start any new boards" after they started the board.

If the intention is to expel [as a discipline] the contestants for insubordination, it would be in the TD's purview to stop play. This does not speak to the wisdom or lack thereof of doing so.

[blackshoe]

 axman, on 2015-April-08, 14:02, said:

If the intention is to expel [as a discipline] the contestants for insubordination, it would be in the TD's purview to stop play. This does not speak to the wisdom or lack thereof of doing so.

Hm. I think you misread my comment about the clock. If not, what is the insubordination? Also, you don't say what laws you're using.

[pran]

 blackshoe, on 2015-April-08, 13:49, said:

Under what circumstances, and using what law(s), is a director justified in stopping players from completing a hand after they've started it and before they've finished it? You can assume that there's a clock, and that the clock program announced "do not start any new boards" after they started the board.

 axman, on 2015-April-08, 14:02, said:

If the intention is to expel [as a discipline] the contestants for insubordination, it would be in the TD's purview to stop play. This does not speak to the wisdom or lack thereof of doing so.

I agree, but believe that he is also justified in stopping the play (at any time) if and when it becomes absolutely clear that he must award artificial adjusted score(s) regardless of the possible outcomes on the board.

[Pig Trader]

My answer to the OP is "none" and I would come from the other direction and quote Law 8B1 to advise any TD from stopping players from completing a hand after they've started it, assuming the players are still sat there and medically able to continue and complete play.

(If there is no irregularity, Law 12C2a won't apply.)

[RMB1]

 blackshoe, on 2015-April-08, 15:09, said:

If not, what is the insubordination? Also, you don't say what laws you're using.

If the clock time for starting new boards had passed, then Law 90B8 says that starting the board is an offence; does this give the TD power to cancel the offending actions?

[RMB1]

 Pig Trader, on 2015-April-08, 16:23, said:

My answer to the OP is "none" and I would come from the other direction and quote Law 8B1 to advise any TD from stopping players from completing a hand after they've started it, ...

Law 8B1 does not prohibit a TD from instructing a late table to abandon the board and for there to be a "progression of players".

[blackshoe]

 pran, on 2015-April-08, 15:11, said:

I agree, but believe that he is also justified in stopping the play (at any time) if and when it becomes absolutely clear that he must award artificial adjusted score(s) regardless of the possible outcomes on the board.

What law(s)?

[blackshoe]

 RMB1, on 2015-April-08, 16:41, said:

Law 8B1 does not prohibit a TD from instructing a late table to abandon the board and for there to be a "progression of players".

Okay.

Quote

Law 8B2: When the Director exercises his authority to postpone play of a board, for that board the round does not end for the players concerned until the board has been played and the score agreed and recorded or the Director has canceled the play of the board.

There is an implication here that the director can cancel a board, but implication is not authorization, so when is he authorized, and by which law, to do so? If he does cancel the board, how should it be scored?

[blackshoe]

 RMB1, on 2015-April-08, 16:37, said:

If the clock time for starting new boards had passed, then Law 90B8 says that starting the board is an offence; does this give the TD power to cancel the offending actions?

Read it again. The players start a new board and then the clock program announces "don't start any new boards".

[RMB1]

 blackshoe, on 2015-April-08, 22:48, said:

Read it again. The players start a new board and then the clock program announces "don't start any new boards".

Sorry for the distraction, I was going down someone else's tangent of what happens if they start after the clock.

[RMB1]

Returning to the main point, the problem is to find a law that allows the TD to cancel a scheduled board before it is started but that law does not allow the the TD to cancel a board that has been started.

[campboy]

 pran, on 2015-April-08, 15:11, said:

I agree, but believe that he is also justified in stopping the play (at any time) if and when it becomes absolutely clear that he must award artificial adjusted score(s) regardless of the possible outcomes on the board.

 blackshoe, on 2015-April-08, 16:44, said:

What law(s)?

I imagine pran was thinking of part of 15C: "If any call differs in any way from the corresponding call in the first auction the Director shall cancel the board."

[pran]

 RMB1, on 2015-April-08, 16:41, said:

Law 8B1 does not prohibit a TD from instructing a late table to abandon the board and for there to be a "progression of players".

It sure does:

Law 8B1 said:

1.In general, a round ends when the Director gives the signal for the start of the following round; but if any table has not completed play by that time, the round continues for that table until there has been a progression of players.

So once the players have started a board before an announcement has been made to the effect that no more boards may be started in that round the players have the right to complete play on that board. (TD is free to impose penalties for late play, but that was not the question here.)

[pran]

 blackshoe, on 2015-April-08, 16:44, said:

What law(s)?

Common sense. What should be the purpose on continuing play on a board once it is absolutely clear that artificial score(s) must be assigned regardless of the outcome on such play.

If you insist upon a Law then try Law 74B4.

[pran]

 blackshoe, on 2015-April-08, 16:50, said:

There is an implication here that the director can cancel a board, but implication is not authorization, so when is he authorized, and by which law, to do so? If he does cancel the board, how should it be scored?

Law 8B2 does not permit the Director to cancel a Board, it permits him to postpone the play on that Board.

[pran]

 campboy, on 2015-April-09, 03:11, said:

I imagine pran was thinking of part of 15C: "If any call differs in any way from the corresponding call in the first auction the Director shall cancel the board."

No, I was not thinking on any particular Law, I simply applied common sense to any imagined situation where (continued) play would be meaningless.

Yes, Law 15C is one such possibility.

[pran]

 RMB1, on 2015-April-09, 03:04, said:

Returning to the main point, the problem is to find a law that allows the TD to cancel a scheduled board before it is started but that law does not allow the the TD to cancel a board that has been started.

There is no such Law.

You may have a regulation that prohibits players to start on a new board after a specific announcement (e.g. end of round), but any regulation to the effect that the Director may cancel a board that was already started at the time of such announcement will be in conflict with Law 8B1 and therefore illegal.

[chrism]

 pran, on 2015-April-09, 04:23, said:

There is no such Law.

You may have a regulation that prohibits players to start on a new board after a specific announcement (e.g. end of round), but any regulation to the effect that the Director may cancel a board that was already started at the time of such announcement will be in conflict with Law 8B1 and therefore illegal.

I disagree. Law 8B1 defines what constitutes the end of the round; it does not address the circumstances that may result in "a progression of players". If the TD is allowed to cancel a board in mid-flight, there will be a progression of players and the next round will begin for that table; if not, the round will continue until play of the board is completed. I do not think that "the round continues" is the necessarily equivalent to "play of the current board continues". Indeed the law could have said, and did not: "if any table has not completed play by that time, the round continues for that table until play is completed there". It also does not say "if any table has not completed play of a board by that time, the round continues for that table until play of that board is complete", so reading 8B1 as restrictive the TD's powers to curtail would also appear to prohibit requiring a late play for a scheduled board not started when the round is called.

I do not see any law that explicitly permits or prohibits the curtailment by the TD of a board in progress, except insofar as it comes under 81C1 "... to ensure the orderly progress of the game".

[Vampyr]

 blackshoe, on 2015-April-08, 13:49, said:

Under what circumstances, and using what law(s), is a director justified in stopping players from completing a hand after they've started it and before they've finished it? You can assume that there's a clock, and that the clock program announced "do not start any new boards" after they started the board.

Is this a quiz? I think that the circumstance would be that the director or the players discover that one pair has already played the board. Or, rarely, if the board is being played for the last time and it is discovered to have been fouled between being played at the previous table and arriving at our heroes' table. Or if one of the pairs is being immediately ejected from the event.

Do I win?