awm Posted January 8, 2006 Report Share Posted January 8, 2006 This came up in a recent club game: [hv=d=s&v=b&n=sat86h96dt9765c42&w=sk943hak52dj42c75&e=s52hqt87dq83cjt83&s=sqj7hj43dakcakq96]399|300|Scoring: MP[/hv] South opened 2NT (20-21) and everyone passed. West lead a low heart and E/W cashed the first four heart tricks ending in the west hand; declarer pitched the ♠7 from hand and a spade and a diamond from dummy. West continued with the ♠K, won in dummy, and declarer ran three rounds of clubs. At this point the position was: [hv=d=s&v=b&n=sat86h96dt9765c42&w=sk943hak52dj42c75&e=s52hqt87dq83cjt83&s=sqj7hj43dakcakq96]399|300|Scoring: MP[/hv] At this point declarer threw his hand face-up on the table and announced "I have the rest." When east asked "what are you doing?" declarer responded "they're all good." East now showed declarer the ♣J and called the director. What is the proper ruling? The Laws state (Law 70): In ruling on a contested claim, the Director adjudicates the result of the board as equitably as possible to both sides, but any doubtful points shall be resolved against the declarer. The Director proceeds as follows: 1. Require Claimer to Repeat Statement2. Require all Hands to be Faced3. Hear Objections .... (stuff about an outstanding trump omitted) The Director shall not accept from claimer any successful line of play not embraced in the original clarification statement if there is an alternative normal line of play that would be less successful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jlall Posted January 8, 2006 Report Share Posted January 8, 2006 The way I have always understood this, if south clearly thinks his hand is good he could cash his tricks in any order since they're all the same (in his mind). Thus he must cash them in the worst possible way for himself. Thus he would cash the pointed suit winners then exit a club. East would win and cash a diamond, 2 tricks for the defense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finch Posted January 8, 2006 Report Share Posted January 8, 2006 As Justin says. Two tricks for EW. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerben42 Posted January 9, 2006 Report Share Posted January 9, 2006 Clearly this is the right answer. Hope South learns something about claiming. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bearmum Posted January 9, 2006 Report Share Posted January 9, 2006 As Justin says. Two tricks for EW. ITA -- and agree that claiming in F2F may not be the way to go :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Posted January 9, 2006 Report Share Posted January 9, 2006 Lots of players forget to state a line of play. So 2 tricks to EW looks clear. HOWEVER! There's a line of play which concedes 3 tricks to EW, so this should actually be the ruling: ♦AK (E deblocking ♦Q), ♣ to the J North discarding ♠T, ♦ to West's J South discarding ♠J, and ♠9 from W. Maybe this is quite greedy and a very unlogic way of play, but it's a possibility since declarer didn't state his line of play. So actually EW should get 3 tricks... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P_Marlowe Posted January 9, 2006 Report Share Posted January 9, 2006 Lots of players forget to state a line of play. So 2 tricks to EW looks clear. HOWEVER! There's a line of play which concedes 3 tricks to EW, so this should actually be the ruling: ♦AK (E deblocking ♦Q), ♣ to the J North discarding ♠T, ♦ to West's J South discarding ♠J, and ♠9 from W. Maybe this is quite greedy and a very unlogic way of play, but it's a possibility since declarer didn't state his line of play. So actually EW should get 3 tricks... Hi, I did not bother looking at your line,but only reasonable lines have to be considered. An example, Declarer holdJ2 in trump a defender the 8, it is standard ruling, that declarer does not have to play the 2. He cashes his tricks top down.... look at various threads on RGB, you willfind this view supported e.g. by David Stevenson. If your suggested line is reasonable or not has someone else to decide. With kind regardsMarlowe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blofeld Posted January 9, 2006 Report Share Posted January 9, 2006 I think that Frederick's suggested line is unreasonable. When declarer loses the club, obviously he is no longer bound to believe that he makes the rest regardless of which cards he plays. Hence, just 2 tricks to EW. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barmar Posted January 9, 2006 Report Share Posted January 9, 2006 I agree with Marlowe and Blofeld. The law says "normal line of play", and IIRC it refers to a footnote that says this doesn't include irrational plays. Irrational plays typically refer to running suits from the bottom instead of the top and pitching high cards instead of low cards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jlall Posted January 9, 2006 Report Share Posted January 9, 2006 Lots of players forget to state a line of play. It's not that south forgot to state a line of play. It's his statement that he has the rest. For instance, if he said "you get 1" I would not ask him to state a line of play as that is absurd. In fact if he claimed and made no statement at all and was not a novice I would assume he's giving me a trick. I don't like the suggestion of not claiming face to face. Claiming is a courtesy to everyone to speed up the game. I will never try to get someone unless they clearly are mistaken about what's left (like this player who claimed to have ALL of the tricks). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pigpenz Posted January 9, 2006 Report Share Posted January 9, 2006 yes the TD cant make declarer do anything irrational, but claiming when you dont have all the rest of tricks is sort of irriational too ;) 2 tricks to EW-next hand Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barmar Posted January 10, 2006 Report Share Posted January 10, 2006 Forgetting about an outstanding winner in an opponent's hand isn't irrational, it's just a mistake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.