jerdonald Posted July 5, 2015 Report Share Posted July 5, 2015 BBO forum, Playing declarer in a NT contract this week I was leading the second last trick. I led the 13th club as kind of a squeeze card and my LHO assumed I would lead one of her suits and exposed her 2 remaining cards. They were the spade ace and the heart king. She immediately pulled her cards back and I didn't call the director. My mistake. On the board were 2 spade spot cards. The king of spades and the queen of hearts had not been played yet. Her partner certainly has UI and, depending on what penalty card is played, will know what suit to save. My question is since both exposed cards are major penalty cards who decides which card she has to play on my club lead. Jerry D. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgrice Posted July 5, 2015 Report Share Posted July 5, 2015 BBO forum, Playing declarer in a NT contract this week I was leading the second last trick. I led the 13th club as kind of a squeeze card and my LHO assumed I would lead one of her suits and exposed her 2 remaining cards. They were the spade ace and the heart king. She immediately pulled her cards back and I didn't call the director. My mistake. On the board were 2 spade spot cards. The king of spades and the queen of hearts had not been played yet. Her partner certainly has UI and, depending on what penalty card is played, will know what suit to save. My question is since both exposed cards are major penalty cards who decides which card she has to play on my club lead. Jerry D. L51A covers the basic question:A. Offender to PlayIf it is a defender’s turn to play and that defender has two or more penalty cards that can legally be played, declarer designates which is to be played at that turn. L50E3 should also be used if NOS are damaged by exposure of the penalty card(s).E. Information from a Penalty Card1. Knowledge of the requirements for playing a penalty card is authorized information for all players.2. Other information derived from sight of a penalty card is unauthorized for the partner of the player who has the penalty card (but authorized for declarer).3. If the Director judges that the exposed card conveyed such information as to damage the non-offending side he shall award an adjusted score. Peter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerdonald Posted July 5, 2015 Author Report Share Posted July 5, 2015 BBO forum, Ok I see how these laws address this situation. The defender had only exposed her cards for a short period of time but they were both visible for anyone at the table. If the director was called and her partner said she didn't quite see the cards how should the director rule? Jerry D. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lamford Posted July 5, 2015 Report Share Posted July 5, 2015 If the director was called and her partner said she didn't quite see the cards how should the director rule?I think it is sufficient that they could have been seen by her partner. Law 49 has "when a defender’s card is in a position in which his partner could possibly see its face <snip>". So they are still major penalty cards. However this could well be deemed a claim by a defender, when they would not be penalty cards, but Law 16D would apply so that her partner could not use the sight of these cards to decide on her discard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgrice Posted July 6, 2015 Report Share Posted July 6, 2015 I think it is sufficient that they could have been seen by her partner. Law 49 has "when a defender’s card is in a position in which his partner could possibly see its face <snip>". So they are still major penalty cards. However this could well be deemed a claim by a defender, when they would not be penalty cards, but Law 16D would apply so that her partner could not use the sight of these cards to decide on her discard. I agree that this could have been a(n)(aborted) claim ... but the ruling probably would be the same, via a different route. Would there be a rational alternative to "keep the suit partner discards" for the non-offending defender? We would need to look at the play to the first 11 tricks to be sure. Peter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pran Posted July 6, 2015 Report Share Posted July 6, 2015 I agree that this could have been a(n)(aborted) claim ... but the ruling probably would be the same, via a different route. Would there be a rational alternative to "keep the suit partner discards" for the non-offending defender? We would need to look at the play to the first 11 tricks to be sure. PeterIf the non-offending defender holds a spade and a Diamond and partner discards a heart the knowledge that partner holds a spade as his last card can be crucial and is most certainly UI from the withdrawn penalty cards. So "keep the suit partner discards" is often of little value. BTW, there is no such thing as an aborted claim, but an aborted concession is absolutely possible - not that it makes any difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weejonnie Posted July 6, 2015 Report Share Posted July 6, 2015 Simple rule about concessions. Don't! If the concession is correct then obviously no problem - but if you have made a mistake then you could be forbidden from using partner's refusal to accept the concession to pick the right play (assuming that there is a winning and a losing option). If you don't concede then at least you have a chance playing randomly that you will succeed. 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.