How desperate are you to win?

[miamijd]

I haven't played a club game in almost 20 years, but the less of the director I saw in a club game, the better. I don't know that I would have called the director, especially since the one at your club seems a bit dimwitted.

 

Tournament is another matter. Director gets called, and I would appeal the ruling if it didn't go my way, because it's obvious that the defenders should get to designate which card gets played.

 

Cheers,

Mike

[42xxbfxx42]

The call of "any" by declarer is technically not allowed, and certainly the dummy is not allowed to use their judgement in determining which card to play ... if it were allowed, an inexperienced (or inattentive) declarer could then say play "any", asking partner, perhaps a professional, to make the correct discard ... we all know that the dummy is not allowed to be involved in the play of the hand.

 

This type of situation, and there are many, should be handled by the director ... at our club the "director please" call is always a friendly encounter and a learning experience.

[GrahamJson]

Note that declarer can change the card played from dummy provided the card he called for was "a slip of the tongue":-

 

Declarer may correct an unintended designation of a card from dummy until he next plays a card from either his own hand or from dummy. A change of designation may be allowed after a slip of the tongue, but not after a loss of concentration or a reconsideration of action. If an opponent has, in turn, played a card that was legal before the change in designation, that opponent may withdraw the card so played, return it to his hand, and substitute another (see Laws 47D and 16C1). 5

 

 

It seems to me in this case that nominating "any" could only be considered a slip of the tongue if the previous trick or tricks were called out as something like "any small spade" and it was clear that "any" was just a continuation of this.

[pescetom]

 

 

It seems to me in this case that nominating "any" could only be considered a slip of the tongue if the previous trick or tricks were called out as something like "any small spade" and it was clear that "any" was just a continuation of this.

But nobody calls "any small spade" which is pointlessly ambiguous: they call "a spade " or "small spade".

 

In this particular case he could logically have called "a spade" or even "high spade " if he wanted. The fact that he argued it was obvious that he intended SMALL spade indicates that he wasn't thinking clearly even after the mistake.

[mikestar13]

The Law plainly says when calling cards from dummy, declarer is to name both rank and suit. Just go ahead and do that. Small inarguable exceptions are reasonable such as naming the rank only when following suit or saying "low spade" holding ♠A532. But don't ever say "play anything", I've played for forty years and haven't done that.

[pescetom]

The Law plainly says when calling cards from dummy, declarer is to name both rank and suit. Just go ahead and do that. Small inarguable exceptions are reasonable such as naming the rank only when following suit or saying "low spade" holding ♠A532. But don't ever say "play anything", I've played for forty years and haven't done that.

 

I also object politely when opponents say "take it" or "ruff it".

[Tramticket]

Thanks all. Interesting to gauge how others feel.

 

what card did he discard on the previous trick, or was there a ♣ in dummy at that time?? if he discarded a small ♠ on previous trick, then 'any' surely would say a ♠ again.

No, there was a club in dummy. This was the first discard.

 

 

I find the heading on the poll extremely disappointing, "how desperate are you to win?"

 

Sir calling the director has NOTHING TO DO WITH DESPERATION to win at all costs.

Yes, the use of "desperate" was a little provocative and although it was used for rhetorical effect it was a bit over the top. On the other hand ...

 

 

The use of the word "desperate" in this poll is disgusting.

Maybe "disgusting" is also over the top!

 

 

My goal at the club night is to play well, not to make enemies.

 

This was well put and reflects my own view. I was a little sad that declarer chose to argue his case. He is experienced enough to know better. Maybe declarer was a little too desperate to win?

[blackshoe]

The call of "any" by declarer is technically not allowed, and certainly the dummy is not allowed to use their judgement in determining which card to play

You're right about the first thing - Law 46A says declarer plays a card in dummy by naming the rank and denomination of the card. You're wrong, technically, about the second, because Laws 42A3 and 45B instruct dummy to place the card declarer has played in the played position. Declarer called for some card, so dummy has to do that. It is true that dummy's judgement might not be allowed to stand, for as has been said Law 46B5 allows either defender to designate the card to be played.

 

I agree fully with others that calling the director should not be a problem, should not be viewed as "desperation to win" and should not result in any acrimony on anyone's part. There was an irregularity. If the defense wants to ignore that and not call the director, they have that right (see Law 9). But if anyone draws attention to the irregularity, all four players at the table are responsible to call the director. Even if attention is not called to it, either defender can call the director. Once that it done, what happens is up to the director, and to no one else, save that a contestant who disagrees with the director's ruling is entitled to appeal.

 

There is this "don't call the director in clubs" idea. I think it's a bad idea. Even club players ought to learn the rules of the game they're playing, and learn to accept with good grace the director's ruling when given.

[Vampyr]

never claim never call for any card from dummy always pick them up and play them. Even I would have called the td here.

 

Proper procedure is that dummy plays the cards for declarer if she is at the table and is physically capable. I know that I would find it distracting if declarer played the cards every time. It is not like rubber bridge, where the cards are played into the middle of the table.

 

Sir calling the director has NOTHING TO DOI WITH DESPERATION to win at all costs.If it was an unimportant game I would condone the oversight and would not call the director.As per the conduct of the game any player except the dummy should call the director if ANY INFRINGEMENT occurs at the table.When Declarer said ANY then he should have corrected himself IN THE SAME BREATH as per the rules..Furthermore when the RHO followed to the trick it was too late for any correction.The late correction is an infringement.In a tournament of seriously minded players I,personally,,would certainly have called the Director and appealed had he allowed the card to be withdrawn.

 

It is surprising how many players think that “in the same breath” is a thing. It is not.

[pescetom]

Proper procedure is that dummy plays the cards for declarer if she is at the table and is physically capable. I know that I would find it distracting if declarer played the cards every time. It is not like rubber bridge, where the cards are played into the middle of the table.

 

I'm unduly sensitive to distraction, but I don't find it a problem when declarer plays the cards herself, so long as she does the whole thing effectively and without indecisions. Yes it's a bit irritating if she plays the card towards the middle of the table, but I can live with that. I find it more of a distraction when dummy is playing the cards but continually reorders them or gets a bit too involved in play, without clearly meriting a Director call.

[Cyberyeti]

For me it would depend who it was. If I thought they'd be an ass if roles were reversed, I'd definitely push it as far as I could. If I was sure they'd not push it, I'd not bother calling. If I didn't know them, not sure.

[HardVector]

I don't think that player strength should matter here, this is a teaching moment. When you say "any card" when designating a discard, you are stating that dummy's cards are immaterial to the future play. In other words, dummy should be dead and you are going to play your hand only. Clearly, this is not the case on this hand and the lack of focus (concentration) in realizing this should have consequences. Not only would I insist on winning those tricks, but if dummy attempted to discard the 9♠ as his "any" card, I would call the director and insist on a diamond discard. This is similar to making a claim and not realizing there is an outstanding trump.

 

As declarer, I should realize that I had made a big mistake and take my medicine.

[Vampyr]

I'm unduly sensitive to distraction, but I don't find it a problem when declarer plays the cards herself, so long as she does the whole thing effectively and without indecisions. Yes it's a bit irritating if she plays the card towards the middle of the table, but I can live with that.

 

Mind you, many of us cannot reach far enough to play the card behind the dummy hand. I normally play the card near the board (on it if I am N/S) and then put the quitted card into the board.

 

But I feel that it is desirable to follow the procedure in the Laws.

 

I had a friend, a very good player, with whom I played sometimes. EVERY time he was dummy he was either at the bar (he was a big drinker) or having a fag. I found it really annoying to have to play every dummy myself.