Interesting question

[peachy]

In today's vugraph, the operator said that declarer asked "How many tricks have I lost?" in the middle of playing a hand. My questions are simple, but I haven't figured where the answer lies.

Is declarer's question legal? If yes, by which law? And then: who is allowed/required to answer that question?

[RMB1]

Is declarer's question legal? If yes, by which law? And then: who is allowed/required to answer that question?

 

I don't think the question is illegal unless it misleads the opponents.

Dummy is not allowed to answer.

Opponents are not required to answer.

[peachy]

I don't think the question is illegal unless it misleads the opponents.

Dummy is not allowed to answer.

Opponents are not required to answer.

 

Where in the laws are things like that mentioned? As to misleading, it could simply break the defenders' focus, if nothing else. Some might even go further and suspect it was intended to do just that.

[Phil]

I know from experience that declarer is not allowed to ask dummy the trick count. There is potential UI.

 

I cannot see a problem with declarer looking across the table and looking at dummy's "hopefully well organized" arrangment of tricks.

[G_R__E_G]

I don't think this specific question is really covered in the laws but Declarer has the right per Law 65C to request that the defenders arrange the quitted tricks properly so that they can see how many are pointed in each direction. Asking how many tricks they've lost might be simpler.

[RMB1]

... but Declarer has the right per Law 65C to request that the defenders arrange the quitted tricks properly ...

 

I don't see anything in Law 65C about Declarer's rights. It just establishes correct procedure and says explicitly that this procedure is to "permit review of the play after its completion", not for determining how many tricks have been won during play.

 

If declarer wants to know how many tricks have been won or lost, he/she or dummy should keep track as per Law 65B 1/2. If he wants opponents to point their tricks properly, he must require a correction of each card wrongly pointed (Law 65B3).

[RMB1]

Where in the laws are things like that mentioned?

 

The laws do not mention declarer asking such a question or opponents' requirement to answer, so we can infer that the laws do not recognise such a request and no requirement to answer exists.

 

Law 73D2 and Law 73F deal with gratuitous remarks.

 

Law 43A1c) prohibits dummy from participating in play and explicitily "... nor may he communicate anything about the play to declarer".

[G_R__E_G]

I don't see anything in Law 65C about Declarer's rights. It just establishes correct procedure and says explicitly that this procedure is to "permit review of the play after its completion", not for determining how many tricks have been won during play.

 

If declarer wants to know how many tricks have been won or lost, he/she or dummy should keep track as per Law 65B 1/2. If he wants opponents to point their tricks properly, he must require a correction of each card wrongly pointed (Law 65B3).

 

 

So you're saying that you think that any player (other than dummy) doesn't have the right to ask that the other players at the table follow Law 65C (and/or call the Director if they're not)?

[mycroft]

Yes, but you can't require them to get it right - except by Robin's method (which loses any ability you have to use their information when *you*'ve screwed up L65C). They're allowed to make mistakes and lose count, same as you. *Usually*, it's to your benefit.

 

I strongly believe that dummy should rest and pay as little attention as possible (without impeding her job as dummy) to save concentration for the rest of the hands. However, I think "keeping correct trick track" is very high priority, especially if declarer frequently bobbles it. Not that she can *say* or *do* anything (illegal), mind you...

[peachy]

I went a little further in my curiosity as to the appropriateness of the OP question.

Law 74C4 in "Violations of Procedure" under PROPRIETIES says the following, in a list of examples of violations:

 

4. commenting or acting during the auction or play

so as to call attention to a significant occurrence or

to the number of tricks still required for success.

 

I think most would think it nitpicking to object to declarer's question 'how many tricks have I lost' but I still think it is wrong of declarer to say such things in any formal sort of event. Play the hand and be quiet :)

[bluejak]

I think it very reasonable for declarer to ask such a question if he wishes. He is asking the opponents only, of course, dummy should not answer, and if the opponents do not wish to answer, so be it.

[pran]

Failing to arrange quitted cards as specified in Laws 65B and 65C is an irregularity to which each player except Dummy may call attention during the play.

 

A consequence of this is that Declarer may require each defenders' cards to be arranged so that he by looking at them can decide the number of tricks won by either side (according to the opinion of the relevant defender).

 

This way declarer may also establish if there is a discrepancy between the number of tricks won according to the arrangements made by the three players, but he is not entitled until the end of the play to have quitted cards inspected for the purpose of establishing the correct number of tricks won.