eagles123 Posted January 5, 2015 Report Share Posted January 5, 2015 It happened tonight a lot: declarer playing out a contract in the hope of some ridiculous defensive error when a claim of minus one or equals or whatever at trick one would be much more appropriate!! Ps forgive me for bad mood 45 percent session oh dear Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zelandakh Posted January 5, 2015 Report Share Posted January 5, 2015 I have made many an impossible contract through ridiculous defensive errors, Roland. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neilkaz Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 You play in a club where people commonly claim at trick 1? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eagles123 Posted January 6, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 I don't mean trick 1 nessecarily, I mean like they expect you to discard the Ace of the suit declarer has bid 5 times or something just seems so disrespectful Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jinksy Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 My view is at IMPs for undoubled overtricks or undertricks, this is pretty annoying, otherwise I'll put up with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dwar0123 Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 I don't mean trick 1 nessecarily, I mean like they expect you to discard the Ace of the suit declarer has bid 5 times or something just seems so disrespectful Why does it bother you, people are allowed not to claim, 99* times out of a 100 when an opponent isn't claiming it is because they don't see the claim or they are reluctant to try and explain it, either because they suspect the opponent won't see it easily (probably not in your case!) or because they might trip up the explanation and some people exploit that. The 1 time out of a 100 when you might be right, no disrespect, but you're not a mind reader, you don't know why they are not claiming. *These numbers are made up. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jillybean Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 I don't mean trick 1 nessecarily, I mean like they expect you to discard the Ace of the suit declarer has bid 5 times or something just seems so disrespectful I would expect it is more from inexperience than disrespect, unless they only play hands out with you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 The frustration occurs when I claim, "I have 5 spades, 4 clubs, 3 Diamonds and one heart." They then ask how I am getting rid of my other heart. It doesn't help to tell them that after I take my 13 tricks they can have all the rest. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manudude03 Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 There have been quite a few times I've claimed with say 5 tricks left crossruffing with the AKQJT, and the opponents complain that they still have trumps. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jinksy Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 The frustration occurs when I claim, "I have 5 spades, 4 clubs, 3 Diamonds and one heart." They then ask how I am getting rid of my other heart. It doesn't help to tell them that after I take my 13 tricks they can have all the rest. The most obnoxious opponent I've ever met at the bridge table complained something about this. She wasn't worried about 'getting rid of' cards, but was adamant that P had no right to claim without knowing where the K♣ was. My P patiently explained that the card was completely irrelevant to the hand (which pissed her off enough that she later started making underhanded remarks about his not having showered). Claiming, we were told, was never ok unless you knew where all the cards were. A couple of boards later she (correctly) claimed the rest of the tricks. We decided not to enquire about the ♦2. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 I guess the exception would be the Diamond 7. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackshoe Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 It happened tonight a lot: declarer playing out a contract in the hope of some ridiculous defensive error when a claim of minus one or equals or whatever at trick one would be much more appropriate!! Ps forgive me for bad mood 45 percent session oh dearMy partner and I had a 32% session, so you're ahead. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cthulhu D Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 My partner and I had a 32% session, so you're ahead. I have turned in -120 imps in 28 ximp boards (:(:(:(:() and 36%, so I think you've gotten me beat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the hog Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 While I totally sympathise with some of these comments, some claims should not be made on line unless you know the opps. I recently claimed AKTxx opposite Q9xx making the comment "Claiming on the marked safety play". The "expert" opponent who held Jxxx refused the claim. Much easier just to cash the A. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 I don't mean trick 1 nessecarily, I mean like they expect you to discard the Ace of the suit declarer has bid 5 times or something just seems so disrespectful If proved, that would be frivolous play. It is indeed ethically reproachable, and the Director can issue a warning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 While I totally sympathise with some of these comments, some claims should not be made on line unless you know the opps. I recently claimed AKTxx opposite Q9xx making the comment "Claiming on the marked safety play". The "expert" opponent who held Jxxx refused the claim. Much easier just to cash the A. Indeed. Online, claiming before it's totally obvious will only make you take like 3x longer to complete the hand :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mbodell Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 I don't mean disrespect to people, but if there is time still left (I.e., no time pressure), especially at matchpoints, I'll often play out a silly defensive problem that opponents can't get wrong if they remember the details of the hand and play correctly. This is because in my experience, even people who I respect can lose focus and blunder and I've been surprised by how often I've gotten extra tricks from this. And occasionally, I'm the one who's blundered and I think it is clear but I've missed something and it wasn't as clear or my claim wouldn't have been good. Things like a pseudo squeezes where if I had suit A I could have cross ruffed the hand so I must have suit B left, but defender pitches the top B to keep the top A card. Or even I've ruffed early in A, and one defender guards A and B, and still pitches B to keep the A guard. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 One thing is hoping for a defensive error that might lead to a squeeze or throw-in. Overthinking straightforward hands for the sake of boring opponents is another one completely different. And sanctioned by the laws. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cthulhu D Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 Isn't there a game theory reason to play out all hands (unless it is impossible for opponents to make a defensive error). If oppo knows you wait until late in the hand to claim they might not pay attention to complex hands until it is too late. If you claim aggressively, oppo knows that if you don't claim they need to pay attention. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMorris Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 I once got told off for not claiming when I had the rest (I had lost concentration and didn't realise they had no more tricks to cash). The complainer told me it was against the Laws Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 I once got told off for not claiming when I had the rest (I had lost concentration and didn't realise they had no more tricks to cash). The complainer told me it was against the LawsProlonging play of a hand for the purpose of annoying the opponents is against the Laws. But, just because they are annoyed doesn't mean it was your purpose. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtK78 Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 The law in question is Law 74 - Conduct and Etiquette. Law 74B4 provides as follows (2008 North American edition): LAW 74 CONDUCT AND ETIQUETTE A. Proper Attitude *** B. Etiquette As a matter of courtesy, a player should refrain from: 1. paying insufficient attention to the game. 2. making gratuitous comments during the auction and play. 3. detaching a card before it is his turn to play. 4. prolonging play unnecessarily (as in playing on although he knows that all the tricks are surely his) for the purpose of disconcerting an opponent. 5. summoning and addressing the Director in a manner discourteous to him or to other contestants Law 74 is part of the Proprieties, but it does have the force of law. I have never seen this particular breach of the proprieties penalized. This does bring up a story, however. Many years ago, a friend of mine was playing on a pick-up Spingold team. He related to me a piece of advice he received from a more experienced player that he was using. That piece of advice - never claim. Play out each hand to the end, no matter how trivial. Over the course of a full day of playing, this will tire out your opponents and you may benefit from it. As you can see, this "piece of advice" is in direct contravention to law 74B4. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barmar Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 I've seen players hold on to an unnecessary card, and discard the setting card, because they forgot that declarer had already shown out in the suit, or they just lost track of the count of the hand. Even good players sometimes have lapses. So playing out the hand can sometimes result in an extra trick like this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 4. prolonging play unnecessarily (as in playing on although he knows that all the tricks are surely his) for the purpose of disconcerting an opponent. This does bring up a story, however. Many years ago, a friend of mine was playing on a pick-up Spingold team. He related to me a piece of advice he received from a more experienced player that he was using. That piece of advice - never claim. Play out each hand to the end, no matter how trivial. Over the course of a full day of playing, this will tire out your opponents and you may benefit from it. As you can see, this "piece of advice" is in direct contravention to law 74B4.[/font][/font][/size]Not necessarily. Depends on the person's threshold for "trivial". The example in "4" above is a case where we have all the tricks and know it. To me, this is beyond "trivial" I see nothing in the proprieties or anywhere else which requires a claim of all but one trick. It seems lawful to play those out, no matter how trivial the possibility an opponent will discard that one winning trick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nige1 Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 It happened tonight a lot: declarer playing out a contract in the hope of some ridiculous defensive error when a claim of minus one or equals or whatever at trick one would be much more appropriate!! Ps forgive me for bad mood 45 percent session oh dear. As a defender, if you hold the critical card(s), you can claim yourself. On Bridgewinners, Michael Rosenberg criticised Eric Rodwell for playing out 6N, where he had 12 winners but no sensible prospect of a thirteenth. Some argued that Eric was justified, in theory and practice, when exasperated opponents misdefended to give jim an overtrick. In a recent match in Edinburgh, declarer was playing on, in the hopes of an overtrick. RHO said that the hand was an open book and asked declarer to claim. Declarer refused. LHO then explained to declarer that she had no prospects of an overtrick. Declarer said she wanted to play on. After a few more exchanges, declarer called the director. Declarer did not make an overtrick but in the other room, in the same contract, an overtrick was made. The director never gave a ruling but I felt this was wrong. As defender, you can claim, yourself. Asking declarer to claim, instead, provides buckets of UI to partner, especially if you specify a number of tricks. For example, if you are sure the declarer is just playing for overtricks, you are unlikely to risk an imaginative and dangerous gambit that might set the contract on another layout. In general, however, I agree with Eagles123. People should claim more. Especially on BBO, which has an excellent claim protocol. 1 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.