Was this the right ruling?

[bd71]

[hv=d=s&v=e&n=saqthqj754dqckqj5&w=sk9852h93d542ca73&e=s63hk8dat976c9862&s=sj74hat62dkj83ct4]399|300|Scoring: MP

North playing in 4H[/hv]

 

I made a bad claim today playing in int/advanced pairs game. At the table, I felt the directors ruling was reasonable. But during the post-tourney discussion on this hand (it made the difference between us finishing 2nd and 4th in 2-session pairs event), a friend suggested that the director may not have it right.

 

E led a low diamond, won by my singleton Q. I finessed in hearts and played a 2nd round to draw trump. Then led a club from dummy, which W took with the A, and he played a low spade. I won the ace, and claimed the rest of the tricks, saying that I would cash my 3 clubs (without saying what was being discarded from dummy), go to dummy with trump, and cash my "two high diamonds" dropping the 2 spade losers in my hand. Obviously, I forgot the AD was still out.

 

Director ruling was that opponents get obvious AD trick and a spade trick, making 4 but a bad MP score.

 

My friend suggested that it would be illogical not to discard spades from dummy as I cashed my clubs, and it's not right to assume I would be illogical. If I had dropped dummy's spades on the clubs, even after being surprised with the AD (had play proceeded as per my claim), I would NOT have a spade trick to lose. So the suggestion is that making 5 is the right ruling.

 

So...what's the right standard here and was this a correct decision?

[Mbodell]

I am not a certified director, but I think the ruling is correct.

 

You have to make 2 discards from dummy and have 3 "useless" cards (7♠, J♠, 8♦ - assuming you played the lowest spade and diamond on the earlier tricks). Therefore you can pitch any 2 of those 3 cards and it will not matter which ones. If you've forgot the ♦A is out then it is not irrational to pitch the 7♠ and the 8♦ say, as that will still let you win all the tricks. Therefore I'd rule you lose the ♣A the ♦A and the ♠K for making 4. Sorry.

[RMB1]

If discarding a small diamond on the clubs is irrational, why did take another player in the bar after the end of the session to point this out. :)

[mjj29]

I would cash my 3 clubs (without saying what was being discarded from dummy), go to dummy with trump, and cash my "two high diamonds" dropping the 2 spade losers in my hand.  Obviously, I forgot the AD was still out.

Didn't you (assuming what I just quoted is what you said at the claim) actually say you were discarding the spades on the _diamonds_ in the claim. If you had not specified on what you were throwing the spades then the standard would be "careless but not irrational", but if you specify that you are going to make the losing play when you claim I don't think there's any reason not to take that at face value

[blackshoe]

If discarding a small diamond on the clubs is irrational, why did take another player in the bar after the end of the session to point this out. :)

Irrational does not mean obvious.

[mrdct]

The table ruling looks spot on to me. If you think the ♦KJ are high, it is a perfectly reasonable line to use those to pitch your losing ♠s.

[RMB1]

Irrational does not mean obvious.

Is that what you meant to say?

 

I expect the irrational to be obviously irrational. If the TD ruled ten tricks because a normal line was to discard at least one diamond on the clubs, I expect a player at the table, who subsequently claims such a play is irrational, to spot that that is a play he would never make at the time.

 

Of course "irrational" does not appear in the relevant laws/footnotes, I am assuming "irrational" is short hand for "worse than careless or inferior".

[aguahombre]

I am not a certified director, but I think the ruling is correct.

Neither am I, for which many people are grateful. And the ruling seems just fine.

 

In fact, isn't it the only ruling he can make? Maybe a committee can decide degrees of carelessness, but I don't think the director should.

[bluejak]

An AC is bound by the same Law book as a TD. Whether it is careless or not is the same judgement for an AC as a TD.

[jdonn]

Director is right. If your diamonds are high and you are going to pitch spade losers from your hand on them anyway, then what difference is it whether you pitch 2 spades or 1 spade + 1 diamond on the clubs? Neither is irrational at all.

[barmar]

I agree with all the responses that say the ruling was correct.

 

You didn't need to pitch anything on the diamonds. Once you pitch two spades from dummy on the club, you just crossruff the rest. Since you claimed that you were going to pitch your spades on the diamonds, you apparently didn't see that line. Why would you need to pitch spades from hand if they could be ruffed?

 

The law on claims says you can be deemed to take an inferior or careless line, but not irrational. Discarding a diamond from dummy because you expect to be able to discard your spades on the high diamonds is definitely inferior.