gnasher Posted November 5, 2015 Report Share Posted November 5, 2015 But if you call the TD, declarer has some time to think it through while you are waiting for the director. So maybe the spontaneous response you get if you ask him how he will play it is more illuminating.Well, most people are honest. And if you demand a spontaneous response, you may in fact get a flustered response which says something different from what was in the player's mind at the time of claim. Gaining because you inadvertently bullied declarer into saying the wrong thing would be far worse than losing because you followed the rules. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackshoe Posted November 8, 2015 Report Share Posted November 8, 2015 There's nothing "douchey" about calling the director. What's wrong is getting the director to rule one down if you personally think that declarer had noticed the blockage and was going to play it correctly. There is absolutely nothing wrong with this procedure:- Call the director and explain the problem- Listen to what declarer says to the director- If you think declarer knew about the blockage, tell the director you accept the claim.- If you think declarer didn't know about the blockage, tell the director you wish to contest the claim. Note to Ed: Law 70 begins "In ruling on a contested claim or concession". If the claim isn't contested, he has no power to rule on the claim.What you're suggesting amounts to contesting a claim and then withdrawing your objection. There doesn't seem to be a provision in law that would allow this. So I'm not so sure your "there is absolutely nothing wrong with this procedure" is correct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barmar Posted November 9, 2015 Report Share Posted November 9, 2015 If you call the director because you contest a claim, is there really anything wrong with then telling the director that you now realize you made a mistake? Of course, it's still up to the director to make the ruling, but this statement should be helpful to him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mycroft Posted November 9, 2015 Report Share Posted November 9, 2015 "I see it now, sorry". As a TD, *most* of my contested claims rulings (the ones that aren't "he didn't mention the trump" ones, anyway) are "I don't understand what declarer said", and usually, having the TD understand it and reword it, or move a couple of cards around, clarifies the situation. In fact, I strongly encourage this behaviour (especially from the weaker players) rather than griping about "why can't we play on" or "I hate it when they claim" or "they're just trying to show how much smarter they are than me" - or saying this at the table before the TD gets called (with 4 pissed off players, now, instead of one). As in a lot of cases, it's just easier to say "I contest the claim"/"I can't see it"/"I don't agree", call the TD, and let the TD handle it. Oh, and when declarer asks "what's your problem with the claim" - don't give him any information to help him "get it right" without the TD present. "I don't think the diamonds run" == "oh, of course I would play them this way and pick up your 5-0 break because..." Having said that, accept the TD ruling in their favour with good grace (such as when declarer had a two-way guess for the queen, and I could have not had it for my 12-14 NT rather than the 14-count I had; "but he didn't tell me what his problem was so I could explain" - of course I didn't. However, the TD's ruling was disappointing, but reasonable (an expert would know that my partner wouldn't have played the way she did with the queen) and I thanked him for the ruling and went on.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WellSpyder Posted November 10, 2015 Report Share Posted November 10, 2015 when declarer asks "what's your problem with the claim" "you haven't stated how you are going to play it." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mycroft Posted November 10, 2015 Report Share Posted November 10, 2015 well, okay, that; but even that could be a wakeup call unless you always do it. But I was discussing the claims where there *is* a claim statement, but it's either incomplete, or doomed to bad breaks, or "didn't mention the trump" - where any request for clarification will flag the problem to declarer so he can get it right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barmar Posted November 11, 2015 Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 Law 70 says "any doubtful point as to a claim shall be resolved against the claimer". It then goes on to provide detailed guidance to the director regarding not mentioning the trump and other considerations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mycroft Posted November 11, 2015 Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 Absolutely. But tell declarer what the problem is, and by the time the TD arrives, there won't be a doubtful point - or at least the explanation as to why will be as solid as declarer can make it. Good luck making the argument that that wasn't actually mentioned until after declarer knew there was a problem. A great TD will be able to work out the timing and will rule according to the initial claim statement according to Law 70. A merely superior one will try, and potentially fail. Call the TD, and tell *her* what your issue is. Don't tell declarer, unless it's clearly a "no, I'm getting one regardless" situation. Definitely don't be intimidated by "stronger players" into accepting claims you a) don't understand, or b) you think may go down on a bad play. 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.