Rejection of claims

[Old York]

I never claim until I am certain of all of the remaining tricks, or all but 1 etc, but I have come across many opponent who always reject claims, with no reason, explanation or any expectation of winning any trick

 

The sort of situation I am referring to is when I can see solid top tricks in both hands and oppo still refuse to accept the claim, so could it not be argued that these opponents are acting unethically?

 

Law 74b4 states that a player should not prolong the play unnecessarily.....in an effort to disconcert their opponents

 

What other possible reason could a defender have to refuse such claims other than hoping to get declarer so angry as to make a mistake or mis-click? There cannot be any logical bridge reason for refusal

 

I know many of you will say that a defender has the right to refuse, without explanation.... but this is a rule which only works in f2f bridge, because the TD must then be called and play stops, so frivolous refusals are rare in f2f but very common online

 

Tony

[paulg]

From BBO "The Rules of this Site":

 

"All members have the right to reject an undo, redeal, or claim request for any reason. Members are not required to explain why they have rejected such a request and it is inappropriate for a player to be offended if one of his requests is rejected. If your undo, redeal, or claim is rejected and you do not want to play at the current table anymore, finish the current deal and send a polite chat message before leaving."

[pooltuna]

I never claim until I am certain of all of the remaining tricks, or all but 1 etc, but I have come across many opponent who always reject claims, with no reason, explanation or any expectation of winning any trick

 

The sort of situation I am referring to is when I can see solid top tricks in both hands and oppo still refuse to accept the claim, so could it not be argued that these opponents are acting unethically?

 

Law 74b4 states that a player should not prolong the play unnecessarily.....in an effort to disconcert their opponents

 

What other possible reason could a defender have to refuse such claims other than hoping to get declarer so angry as to make a mistake or mis-click? There cannot be any logical bridge reason for refusal

 

I know many of you will say that a defender has the right to refuse, without explanation.... but this is a rule which only works in f2f bridge, because the TD must then be called and play stops, so frivolous refusals are rare in f2f but very common online

 

Tony

Yep I find it irritating but nevertheless claim as soon as I am sure exactly how many tricks I think[never claimed to be perfect] I am going to take. When rejected I never reclaim figuring it is their turn to claim.

 

Another item that gets me piqued are those who never claim when they know how many tricks they are taking. When in fourth seat for the last trick I normally wait until it is my turn to play before conceding it using the claim system; anything to extract one more click out of the SOB who wouldn't claim. ;)

[helene_t]

I don't think it happens that often, considering how often it happens at the club that people say "please play on".

 

Also, if opps can't see the claim immediately it may be just as fast to play it as to explain the claim.

[paulg]

Online claims are never as simple as f2f for a variety of reasons.

• Many of the weaker players in my circle are not that computer-literate and are not confident in using the Claim button.
  
• A claim is ALWAYS clearer to the claimer than to the opponents. In particular less experienced players will need time to absorb the appearance of all the cards.
  
• We have also seen players on BBO play very badly. Just because I think the claim is obvious, they may have reasonable doubts about my ability.
  
• Some players care passionately about their score and will not claim if there is a very small chance of the defence erring and giving another trick.
  
• I trust that most players believe that the rest of the tricks are theirs when they claim, but the number of director calls in f2f bridge show that a small proportion are faulty. Some of the refusals may be due to this.
  

I agree it can be frustrating, but there will often be good reasons.

 

Paul

[shintaro]

;)

 

Tony I have noticed on occasions that when someone claims and opps accept the software rejects I assume it is a 'bug'

 

;)

[aguahombre]

on OKB, the claimer might reject his own claim by playing a card before acceptance, inadvertently. then the claimer doesn't realize what he has done, and starts getting testy about the rejection. I imagine it is possible in rare cases for the side than is accepting to accidentally reject and then be unable to explain or ask for a reclaim.

 

the only point of this is -- it is not always a deliberate act, and we should just try to "all get along".

[Old York]

Fair comments, all. Thanks for the replies

 

This situation does seem to create a legal paradox. Declarer is under a legal obligation to claim, but defenders have the right to refuse for absolutely no reason. It seems to me that defenders should also comply with rule 74b4

 

Tony

[blackshoe]

Used to be, people would ask in bbo forums "what is the law", and I would say "the law is thus-and-so". Inevitably, someone would come back with "nonsense! this is online bridge!"

 

The law is that if you don't agree with a claim, you call the director. The reality, online, is that you reject the claim. In the former case, you know darn well the director is going to ask you to explain your objection. In the latter, you know darn well the software doesn't care. So there's no incentive to have a good reason to reject it. :)

[barmar]

Blackshoe, you're assuming that there IS a director. That's only true in tourneys, not in the bridge clubs.

 

One of the problems I see with online claims is that players rarely state their line of play. BBO has a box in the claim window where you can type the explanation, but I think I can count on my hands the number of times I've seen it used (and most of them were my f2f partner, on the rare occasions when he plays online). They just assume the opponents can see that they have all the tricks.

[helene_t]

The reason why one must call the TD when a claim is rejected is largely due to circumstances specific to life bridge. In life bridge, declarer can see that it was East who rejected the claim and then take the "marked" finesse over East if play were to continue. This is not the case online.

 

The laws are not written for online bridge, and most online SO's don't have to follow the laws. (There could be a problem with ACBL sanctioned tourneys).

 

Tony I have noticed on occasions that when someone claims and opps accept the software rejects I assume it is a 'bug'

I caused this problem myself when I used an older version of BBO-Flash that was still in my browser cache. After I cleared the cache the bug disappeared. So I think this problem should not occur anymore.

[suokko]

http://www.worldbridge.org/departments/laws/onlinelaws.pd

 

There is special wbf laws for online bridge. I didn't read if there is something special for this case.

[helene_t]

Yeah but that's a sick joke. If you read it you will notice that it has nothing to do with online bridge at all. It is basically just a copy of the f2f laws with a different name. For example it says:

 

"When declarer faces his cards at any time other than immediately after

an opening lead out of turn, he may be deemed to have made a claim"

 

That's a LOL.

[paulg]

The WBF Laws Committee has recommended the On-line Laws be revisited with regard to the provisions of the 2007 Laws of Duplicate Bridge (PDF).

 

One might also hope that they revisit the laws with respect to how the on-line game is actually played on the major sites (e.g., I know of no site where you can make an insufficient bid, revoke, lose a card, etc.).

[Old York]

The BBO rules of the site state:-

 

All members have the right to reject an undo, redeal, or claim request for any reason.

 

They do not say that a player has the right to refuse a claim for no reason

 

It is the last hand in a tournament. All the kibs are screaming "CLAIM!!!!!!"

Declarer is relentlessly leading out his winners

Tournament Director gives an instruction to declarer using table chat "Please Claim Now"

Declarer claims correctly

Opponents reject the claim

What now?

 

Tony

[helene_t]

In that case the director just adjusts the board.

 

Maybe it is unfortunate if the rules state that you can reject a claim for no no reason. Maybe it's better to say that you can reject a claim without having to state a reason.

[blackshoe]

Blackshoe, you're assuming that there IS a director. That's only true in tourneys, not in the bridge clubs.

Okay, fair enough.

 

One of the problems I see with online claims is that players rarely state their line of play.

 

This is, of course, an irregularity. I suppose with no director your choices are to reject the claim or to ask for (insist on?) a line of play statement. B)

[pooltuna]

The BBO rules of the site state:-

 

All members have the right to reject an undo, redeal, or claim request for any reason.

 

They do not say that a player has the right to refuse a claim for no reason

 

It is the last hand in a tournament. All the kibs are screaming "CLAIM!!!!!!"

Declarer is relentlessly leading out his winners

Tournament Director gives an instruction to declarer using table chat "Please Claim Now"

Declarer claims correctly

Opponents reject the claim

What now?

 

Tony

Normally the director verifies the claim and assigns a score altho I think he should have the perogative to change the rejecors score for the hand to 0. Now I just need to think up a good IMPS penalty score B)

[Old York]

Normally the director verifies the claim and assigns a score altho I think he should have the perogative to change the rejectors score for the hand to 0. Now I just need to think up a good IMPS penalty score B)

In extreme cases I have awarded a 1-trick penalty for failing to obey TD/slow play/deliberate time wasting etc

 

Many of the replies have assumed that defenders have a logical and legitimate bridge reason for refusal. They do not on 99% of claims. It is sheer bloody-mindedness or an attempt to get Ave by running out the clock

 

On the question of "statement of claim", what do you expect declarer to add?

Perhaps "I will now cash my tricks"?

 

Tony

[bid_em_up]

The BBO rules of the site state:-

 

All members have the right to reject an undo, redeal, or claim request for any reason.

 

They do not say that a player has the right to refuse a claim for no reason

Unfortunately,

 

"I never accept claims"

"I never allow redeals"

"I always reject undos"

 

suffice as "any" reason. So no matter how much you may claim there is "no reason", there actually may be one.