I want two tricks: equity - and the revoke penalty!

This keeps happening.

You get a TD call for a revoke, you investigate and discover that they did not win the revoke trick but it looks as if they may have gained through revoking, but at most one trick. So you annouce that there is a one trick penalty for the revoke, unless the non-offenders would have got more than one trick if there had been no revoke. The non-offenders think this might be the case: so you go through the play as it would have been without the revoke, and (surprise, surprise) the non-offending side would have made just one more trick. So you explain that the revoke penalty has restored equity and the adjustment is one trick.

Now it kicks off! The non-offender's explain that they have been on a course, or another TD ruled differently, or it is not fair because there is no penalty for the revoke. They want two tricks, one to restore equity and one for the revoke penalty. So you explain again: the restoration of equity is instead of the revoke penalty not in addition. So now they start wondering if equity without the revoke would have been two tricks and you have to go through the possible plays without the revoke. Or they explain that it is not fair and everyone they spoke to thinks the non-offenders should get two tricks. So you explain that your ruling is one trick and they can ask another TD, if it will help; but your colleagues will not thank you for that.

I am dispairing of being able to explain this clearly and firmly so these rulings do not take ten minutes. The law is clear, and I am clear on the law, but somehow it is not being communicated to the players.

Are some TD's being taught this wrong on courses? Or is it just a matter of people hearing what they want to hear, and hoping they can get more that they are entitled?

I am sure it would be easier if we returned to when there were automatic two (three?) trick penalties for a revoke — perhaps then players would learn to follow suit.

Both sides revokes: WBF minute

January is a good time for breaking resolutions! This is discussion of a hypothetical problem (against the stated policy of this blog) which arose from the recent WBF LC meetings. The WBF LC minutes are reproduced in the recent EBU L&E minutes. The item I am interested concerns both sides revoking on the same hand.

7. When both sides have revoked on the same board (Laws 64B7 and 64C), each revoke is examined separately in assessing the equity when that revoke occurs.

What does it mean? Or more accurately, what does the TD do? Having examined each revoke separately and assessed the equity, what does he do with the different answers to arrive at an adjusted score?

Extreme example

	North
	irrelevant
West		A
irrelevant		--
		A K Q J 6 5 4 3
C2 lead		10 9 8 7
	--
	A
	10 9 8 7
	A K Q J 6 5 4 3

South plays in 3NT: North and West follow suit and can not win any tricks. South plays clubs from the top and East discards SA on CJ, and wins C6 with C10. East plays diamonds from the top and South discards HA on DJ, and wins D6 with D10.

South makes 8 tricks. Both sides have revoked: so we examine each revoke separately. Without East's revoke South will make 9 tricks. With East's revoke but without South's revoke, South makes 4 tricks; or 5 tricks if we apply the one trick revoke penalty for East's revoke. This gives two or three separate results: 3NT= and 3NT-5 (and 3NT-4); which one do I assign?

For what it's worth, my vote is for 3NT=, ignoring both revokes. But I don't see how this fits with the wording of the minute.