Asking partner to claim

[661_Pete]

Is this always considered rude?

 

True, I've had the odd shirty response on the odd occasion when, sitting as dummy, I've typed "claim?" on the chatline. Responses on the lines of "I'm perfectly capable of deciding for myself when to claim, thanks!"

 

Why are some players more 'touchy' than others, I wonder?

 

If I'm declarer, and my partner tells me to claim, the last thing I'll do is take umbrage. Sometimes I've held back a claim for a trick or two, because I want to ensure that it's clearer to the opponents. Sometimes I've failed to notice a claim. Sometimes my partner is wrong!

 

This hand cropped up. I was sitting west:

[hv=pc=n&w=sjhkqj97d852cakq6&e=sakqt62h2dat97ct4]266|100[/hv]

Once we reached 6NT, played by east, I was ready to compliment myself ( :unsure: :D ) on an excellent contract. Obviously it fails on a diamond lead, but anything else, provided the spades are not 6-0, it's an absolute certainty. So when a club was led, and my partner ran the J♠, showing that spades weren't 6-0, I was strongly tempted to type "CLAIM!" on the chatline. If the opponents challenged, well, easy to explain: there were enough entries to drive out the A♥ and still cash 12 winners.

 

But I didn't. I kept quiet and waited for the disaster.....

 

Partner contrived to go down, somehow. OK. You can't always blame partner. Everyone has their bad days, myself no exception. But I was sorely disappointed. No-one else bid 6NT on that hand.

[StevenG]

Is this always considered rude?

Yes, it's rude. It's also illegal. As dummy you have no right whatsoever to comment on the hand until it is over, let alone try to influence partner.

[billw55]

Dummy prompting declarer to claim is wrong. It could draw declarer's attention to a successful line of play that he was not yet aware of. As a defender, I always object to this.

 

So far it has only happened on BBO. Once at a live tournament though, a defender prompted me to claim. This tipped me off that the overtrick I was after was definitely available.

[1eyedjack]

The fact that your partner contrived to go down is sufficient justification on its own, had it been required (which it is not), for the regulation barring this sort of intervention by dummy.

[eagles123]

there's obviously a fine line, but sometimes when there's literally five top trumps or something in partners hand and he insists on playing it out then it can be tempting to suggest a claim.

 

what i find more annoying is these people that never claim in defence, like with 2 tricks left you are missing the AQ of a suit in no trumps and have KJ in dummy and there are 8 cards left in the suit, you play small from hand small on the left have a think for a couple of minutes and righty with AQ doesn't claim.

[661_Pete]

The fact that your partner contrived to go down is sufficient justification on its own, had it been required (which it is not), for the regulation barring this sort of intervention by dummy.

I fully agree, when it comes to formal play. I don't know what the official laws* are regarding dummy's rights, but I'm sure I didn't break any! Anyway, this was casual play: I'm just expressing my frustration. You'll have to forgive an old geezer his occasional rants!

 

*[edit] I've since searched for the Laws online and had a quick browse through (eek!). Law 43A.1(c ) states: "Dummy must not participate in the play, nor may he communicate anything about the play to declarer." Whilst this does not explicitly say anything about claims, it seems clear to me, that suggesting a claim to partner is an example of 'participating in play'. Hence, illegal. OK.

[fourdad]

Yes, it's rude. It's also illegal. As dummy you have no right whatsoever to comment on the hand until it is over, let alone try to influence partner.

 

It's called "dummy" for a reason! B-)

[SixOfWands]

It's against the rules of bridge to ask your partner to claim. Dummy cannot assist the play in any way, by suggesting there is a claim available you are suggesting that they can make the contract and they may look again at their line of play. The opponents can ask for the score to be corrected if you do this and in theory you can be banned if you do it persistently and it's reported.

[1eyedjack]

Frankly, a tiny bit of patience is all that is really needed. Just wait until the end of the hand and then suggest to partner that the game would progress at a more tolerable pace had he claimed at trick 6. After all it only really becomes an issue if he repeats the habit hand after hand.

[beschuit]

i dont thinks its rude but it is not done!

[cynac]

I am surpised you opted to defend your stance, as it is probably wrong at a number of levels. As has been pointed out, at worst it is essentially cheating. Partner will realise that there is a certain line of play which wins. Whilst one commenter made the reasonable point that occasionally it makes so much sense to claim, we often do wait until it will be obvious to the defenders (otherwise it can actually slow things down). Since, in BBO, you cannot outline your play, I believe you should only claim if there is no mistake to make. And defenders should only accept in that situation. The odd thing is that the example you chose to use should never prompt your suggestion to partner.....it almost as if you were indeed trying to stop his mucking it up!!!

[msjennifer]

Dummy has to keep mum all the way till the last card is played and the deal is over.Dummy can then call the director and point out any revoke made during the play of the deal.Dummy can not call the director during the course of play.The only exception is if any of the opponents disallows

 

the inherent right of dummy to see a card played by an opponent till dummy's card is face up.Once upon a time this did happen when a rude opponent said "you are dummy so don't speak anything"as I asked his face down card to be shown as dummy's card was still face up.The director then scolded him forthwith and asked him to show me his card played to that trick.Many players do not care or rather are too lazy to go through the "Rules Book of WBF" .Directors Rule Book specially prepared all over should also be read thoroughly if one wishes to be a director in the future and for general knowledge.

[Gerardo]

Since, in BBO, you cannot outline your play,

 

Not true. In the claim popup window there is an empty field which can be filled out with your line of play. Seldom used.

[cynac]

Indeed seldom used. Thanks. Hadn 't even spotted it.

[msjennifer]

A column "How would you rule ?"was/is published practically every month in Bridge World magazine,and is useful for all.Please note that I am in no way canvassing for any literature,

[mediesel]

Yes. And illegal.

 

When declare, I try to give the defenders their two tricks and then claim. This isusually quicker than claiming losing two tricks.

 

On the other hand, After someone just takes the last six top tricks , I rudely ask, claim button broken?

[661_Pete]

Not true. In the claim popup window there is an empty field which can be filled out with your line of play. Seldom used.

I have used it. Especially when I am not claiming all the remaining tricks. Of course, this does rather depend on oppos reading the box when I lodge my claim! :D

 

Another claim-related issue came to my mind recently. I sat down at a (casual) table and found that I was declarer mid-way through playing a hand, after the previous declarer had suddenly quit (flounced maybe?). Now I know full well that in such circumstances, the score of the hand won't be accredited to me but to the AWOL declarer before me. Nevertheless I feel duty bound to play out the hand to the best of my ability.

 

In order to clear the ground a bit, I asked "What's been played up till now?" My partner couldn't help as they, too, had only just joined the table. Opponents were unable or unwilling to cooperate. Eventually the table broke up and the hand was (presumably) adjusted by robots (is that correct?).

 

What I should have done, in those circumstances, was immediately claimed. The defenders would presumably refuse the claim, but I'd then see all the hands and be able to play out the remaining tricks double-dummy. Surely that's only fair, in the circumstances?

 

Next time.....

[Gazumper]

Not true. In the claim popup window there is an empty field which can be filled out with your line of play. Seldom used.

 

Sometimes you can draw inferences from the opps refusal of the claim. You state "top tricks" and when they decline the claim you draw another round of trumps to be "safe" when you might otherwise not have.

[billw55]

What I should have done, in those circumstances, was immediately claimed. The defenders would presumably refuse the claim, but I'd then see all the hands and be able to play out the remaining tricks double-dummy. Surely that's only fair, in the circumstances?

I don't think it works that way. When a claim is made by declarer, defenders can immediately see all four hands, but declarer continues to see only two hands. This remains true after the claim is refused. I suppose it is possible that things are different when there is a change of declarer midhand, but I have never checked this myself.

 

And no, that would most certainly not be fair.

 

 

[barmar]

Another claim-related issue came to my mind recently. I sat down at a (casual) table and found that I was declarer mid-way through playing a hand, after the previous declarer had suddenly quit (flounced maybe?). Now I know full well that in such circumstances, the score of the hand won't be accredited to me but to the AWOL declarer before me. Nevertheless I feel duty bound to play out the hand to the best of my ability.

 

In order to clear the ground a bit, I asked "What's been played up till now?" My partner couldn't help as they, too, had only just joined the table. Opponents were unable or unwilling to cooperate. Eventually the table broke up and the hand was (presumably) adjusted by robots (is that correct?).

When someone leaves in the middle of a hand in the MBC, a robot is supposed to fill in for them immediately, so that human players aren't put into this difficult position. But there are table settings that prevent this, such as having reserved seats.

[1eyedjack]

When someone leaves in the middle of a hand in the MBC, a robot is supposed to fill in for them immediately, so that human players aren't put into this difficult position.

When this happens, is the robot briefed on the sequence of play to date?

[barmar]

When this happens, is the robot briefed on the sequence of play to date?

Yes, it is.

 

IIt's also given the auction, but if you're not playing its system, some of the bids may confuse it.

[661_Pete]

I don't think it works that way. When a claim is made by declarer, defenders can immediately see all four hands, but declarer continues to see only two hands.

OK I stand corrected. I've never tried my suggestion, anyway.

 

The 'fairness' is difficult to judge. If a player 'flounces' deliberately without justification (presumably because they don't like their partners/opponents' play or behaviour) then I feel it's right they ought to face some sort of disciplinary. But sometimes players leave a table for reasons outside their control (lost connection etc.)

 

If I join a table in mid-hand as declarer, then even though the score won't be accredited to me, I feel I owe it to my pro tem partner to make some sort of effort in playing out the hand. At the same time I don't think my opponents should benefit unduly from my misplaying due to lack of knowledge of what went before.

 

A difficult call, as I said. The ideal situation would be for no-one ever to flounce. But I can't have it my way always!

[1eyedjack]

I feel I owe it to my pro tem partner to make some sort of effort in playing out the hand.

I feel a duty to get the hand over as soon as possible, however achieved and whoever benefits. We are not playing for sheep stations.