Claims query

[timjand]

EBU pairs event. Contract is in no trumps. At trick 11, a defender leads a spade. Declarer has a winning spade, Ace of hearts and Queen of diamonds. Believing all three cards are winners, he claims the rest. However the QD is not a winner. Worse, if he leads the QD at trick 12, he loses two more tricks.

 

Since he believes all three cards are winners, should you rule that he may play them in any order thus losing two tricks?

 

Or is "normal play" (Law 70) that he would play the Ace first, similar to the supposition that suits are "normally" led from the top down?

 

Tim

[Vampyr]

EBU pairs event. Contract is in no trumps. At trick 11, a defender leads a spade. Declarer has a winning spade, Ace of hearts and Queen of diamonds. Believing all three cards are winners, he claims the rest. However the QD is not a winner. Worse, if he leads the QD at trick 12, he loses two more tricks.

 

Since he believes all three cards are winners, should you rule that he may play them in any order thus losing two tricks?

 

Or is "normal play" (Law 70) that he would play the Ace first, similar to the supposition that suits are "normally" led from the top down?

 

Tim

 

I do not think that the analogy you posit is valid, but I think it possible that declarer will play the ace first just in case he has miscounted the other suit. Not sure I would rule that way, though.

[blackshoe]

He didn't make a line of play statement? I would rule he loses two tricks. "Possible" isn't good enough.

[weejonnie]

2017 Laws

 

A claim should be accompanied at once by a clear statement of the line of play or defence through which the claimer proposes to win the tricks claimed, including the order in which the cards will be played. The player making the claim or concession faces his hand.

-------------------

 

'should' = failure to do so prejudices the rights of the person - but not often penalised. (or WTTF). There is no penalty for not facing your hand.

 

 

It seems a pretty clear case of awarding two tricks. "Normal includes careless or inferior" - note that 'irrational' at the moment only applies if declarer requires one person rather than another to hold a specific card - and vanishes entirely in the next set of laws. I assume that 'abnormal' means revoking or some such.

 

If anyone is interested I have cobbled together a brief introduction to the new laws Here - mainly for players and of more interest to TDs - obviously not official and my own comments, but a useful starting point.

[timjand]

It seems a pretty clear case of awarding two tricks.

 

This is what I thought too. Though it seems harsh.

 

Imagine this incident at the little known EBU club the Eccentrics. After a bidding mishap declarer has arrived in 6NT holding:

 

AKQJT9876543

K

-

-

 

His partner's highest card is a 6.

 

Inexplicably, the lead is the 2S. "The rest are mine," states an ecstatic declarer, facing his hand, but forgetting the heart loser.

 

The director is called. "I'm sorry, but I have to rule that you play the KH at trick 2. Score will be 11 down."

 

Tim :-)

[weejonnie]

This is what I thought too. Though it seems harsh.

 

Imagine this incident at the little known EBU club the Eccentrics. After a bidding mishap declarer has arrived in 6NT holding:

 

AKQJT9876543

K

-

-

 

His partner's highest card is a 6.

 

Inexplicably, the lead is the 2S. "The rest are mine," states an ecstatic declarer, facing his hand, but forgetting the heart loser.

 

The director is called. "I'm sorry, but I have to rule that you play the KH at trick 2. Score will be 11 down."

 

Tim :-)

 

Well the lesson that players should obey (the new Law 68C) or their rights may be prejudiced will be indelibly inscribed on his memory.

 

C A claim should be accompanied at once by a clear statement of the line of play or defence through which the claimer proposes to win the tricks claimed, including the order in which the cards will be played. The player making the claim or concession faces his hand.

[sanst]

This is what I thought too. Though it seems harsh.

 

Imagine this incident at the little known EBU club the Eccentrics. After a bidding mishap declarer has arrived in 6NT holding:

 

AKQJT9876543

K

-

-

 

His partner's highest card is a 6.

 

Inexplicably, the lead is the 2S. "The rest are mine," states an ecstatic declarer, facing his hand, but forgetting the heart loser.

 

The director is called. "I'm sorry, but I have to rule that you play the KH at trick 2. Score will be 11 down."

 

Tim :-)

Anyone who thinks in trick 1 that a king is the highest card in a suit, doesn't know anything about bridge and is therefore capable of choosing any line of play, however illogical. So minus 11. It seems that none of the players knows anything about bridge, because the opps can pick up 13 tricks.