[BLML] a new sort of claim
Petrus Schuster OSB
petrus at stift-kremsmuenster.at
Thu May 20 08:17:14 CEST 2010
On Thu, 20 May 2010 01:41:57 +0300, David Babcock <dpb3 at fastmail.fm> wrote:
>> So formally speaking dummy may pseudo-claim in order to make opponent
>> show his cards by reflex and go away with it ?
> When we are told that West showed his cards following a claim by dummy,
> I think we can safely assume we are discussing a novice game (or a
> midnight side game), and anyone "getting away with it" probably doesn't
> apply to the actual case.
Unfortunately, as I have pointed out it was neither. It was a regional
tournament with international participation, and while NS were
not-quite-average players, E was a junior international and W a Senior
Lifemaster. And it was about 7 pm.
The problem as I see it is in the wording of L68: "Any statement to the
effect that a contestant will win a specific number of
tricks is a claim of those tricks." does not say by whom. Read strictly,
it would even apply to a statement by a kiebitzer. And as Ton has pointed
out, the first question to be answered is whether a claim by NS has
BTW, if play were to continue there is no play problem for declarer: if W
cashes his good spade, she is down two, otherwise down one.
> Blml mailing list
> Blml at rtflb.org
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
More information about the Blml