cmjohn

I can definitely answer that question. There was no statement associated with the claim at all. Declarer simply exposed his hand and waited for someone to agree or disagree.

Thank you for your opinions. If I were to have made a judgement with an eye towards a club problem, I would have been wrong. But I didn't make that decision. However, there is now another question in my mind. The laws ask the director to make a rather subjective ruling, when applying the rule about "normal" play, it is quite probable that the director would have made the same ruling against any player who made such a claim. In the case under discussion, there were 10 tricks for the taking, without much difficulty in the play, but errors were possible, though not very probable. Is there some criteria for this "normal" play? In the case above, a declarer could due to overconfidence take the practice finesse or botch the communications. This would be unlikely for the player in question. Is "unlikely" enough of a criteria? Say, 90% unlikely? 95% unlikely, 99% unlikely? Is it possible to draw a line here somewhere? Thanks for your consideration.

I was a witness to this event and am a director at this club. I would say that, there was a punitive element to this ruling. The claimer has been advised in the past that he may not claim without stating a line of play. He has at least on one occasion, made this sort of claim when he did not have the tricks he claimed. Other players have complained about this behavior. The director ruled deliberately against the claimer, while believing he was within the letter of the laws, i.e. that "normal" play can include inferior or mistaken play. Had the player not repeatedly refused to follow the rules about claiming, the director might have ruled more generously towards the player, in my opinion. I believe it is acceptable for a director to make rulings with an eye towards the welfare of the club. So, my question is: Is it correct for a director to take a harder line rather than a softer one against a player in recognition of a continuing problem.?