[WellSpyder]

I believe the laws allow for an additional adjustment over and above +/- 3imps in teams matches when one side is judged to have used an illegal agreement but the teammates of the NOS have achieved a good score on the board. However, I can't find any reference to this when looking quickly at the White Book.....

[blackshoe]

#86.1?

[WellSpyder]

blackshoe, on 2010-November-09, 07:53, said:

#86.1?

Many thanks, Blackshoe - this is indeed what I had failed to spot!

So is the TD trying to decide the most likely result(s) that would have occurred in the absence of the illegal agreement? And if the result of this score (or these scores) when imp-ed with the other table is more than 3 imps then that is the assigned score instead (with no additional penalty)?

[RMB1]

The adjusted score for an illegal agreement can be seen as an application of Law 12C2 (via Law 12C1d?) and is subject to the provisions of Law 86D.

But usually when there is a use on an illegal agreement, a result is obtained; indeed the White Book says that a result should be obtained (WB 82.1 c). Then WB 90.4.3, says that the score is +/-3IMP unless the result is better/worse for the non-offending/offending side. If the non-offending side got a good score on the board (at either table) then there is no adjustment and they get to keep that score.

But if the good score at one table is cancelled out by a bad score for the non-offending side at the table where there was an illegal agreement, then the bad score can be replaced by a normal score (possibly weighted) for the purposes of Law 86D, so the non-offending side still get the benefit of their good score.