Jump to content

Is this a claim?


Cascade

Recommended Posts

I don't think it's a claim, either and would adjust under 73F as other people have done.

 

I think the following are not claims:

 

"It doesn't matter what you do" (this one is dubious, it might be)

 

(when dummy hits)"We've missed a cold grand"

 

As a defender, showing declarer a subset of your cards e.g. an AQ over dummy's KJ

 

"It's not worth thinking about this trick" (if untrue, that can lead to a different adjustment, but if true it's not a claim as other tricks may still require thought)

 

The following are claims:

"I've got the rest"

"You are two off"

"My hand is high"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are 2 off need not be a claim, I had a situation where I pulled the wrong card out the bidding box (6H instead of 6N) and didn't notice until dummy put the trumps on the right and I was in a 2-1 fit. RHO said "down 5" (quickly agreed) as a suggestion to agree a score rather than play the stupid contract at pairs when we were a board behind anyway. It was neither intended nor interpreted as a claim.

 

We've missed a cold grand is clearly not a claim, it might not be in the denomination they're playing in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On vugraph today, Helness was declarer in 4M.

 

Operator "Helness: There is no way you can give it [the contract] to me".

 

This sounded like a claim/concession to me.

 

Sure enough, the next report from the operator was "and claimed 9".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RHO said "down 5" (quickly agreed) as a suggestion to agree a score rather than play the stupid contract at pairs when we were a board behind anyway. It was neither intended nor interpreted as a claim.

Maybe I'm dense, but it sure sounds like a claim to me. RHO has claimed 6 tricks for his side. You agreed with his claim, so that's how it was scored (Law 69A). Seems like it was both intended and interpreted as a (valid) claim.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RHO said "down 5" (quickly agreed) as a suggestion to agree a score rather than play the stupid contract at pairs when we were a board behind anyway. It was neither intended nor interpreted as a claim.

Maybe I'm dense, but it sure sounds like a claim to me. RHO has claimed 6 tricks for his side. You agreed with his claim, so that's how it was scored (Law 69A). Seems like it was both intended and interpreted as a (valid) claim.

The tone of voice made it clear that it was a ballpark suggestion rather than a claim and that if I'd said 4 down he'd probably have taken it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...