nigelguthrie at yahoo.co.uk
Wed Sep 8 16:03:44 CEST 2010
Case 1: declarer is in a diamond contract with the lead in dummy and all
trumps are drawn and spades never have been played
Dummy: S - xxxx H - AJ
Declarer: S - xx D - xxxx
Declarer's claim: I will pitch 1 spade loser on the HA and concede 1
The director was called because originally the heart suit was: Kx opposite
AJTx and the 2 tricks previous to the claim were HK followed by a heart to
the Ten and now if play had continued the Q would drop from LHO who
started with Qxx and declarer can discard his last losing spade on the
Declarer was a flight B player who clearly made a careless claim but
should not playing the HJ after the Q drops be considered careless or
how would you rule? Would you rule any differently if the claimer was flight C?
Would you rule any differently if the first 2 heart tricks were at an
earlier stage of the play?
Case 2: declarer is in a heart contract after pulling trumps and
eliminating spades and diamonds with clubs never been played
Dummy: H - xx C - AQJ
Declarer: H - xxx C - xx
Declarer led a low club, LHO followed low and before declarer called for a
card from dummy, RHO placed the CK on the table without saying anything.
The director was called and RHO who started with Kx of clubs said they
were trying to claim by showing declarer that the finesse was off and that
declarer's earlier plays gave away his complete count so it was clear to
RHO that declarer must lose a club.
Declarer was a flight A player who probably could have taken the finesse
(or claimed) at trick 4 since the elimination was completely unnecessary
and at that point he already knew that the final result depends solely on
the club finesse.
RHO was a flight B player who clearly made a careless and impatient play
How do you rule?
I'm just a player but I think the director should rule for the claimer in both
In the first case, declarer said he'd discard a spade on the hearts. In my view,
the law should assume that you cash winners *top down* unless specified
In the second case, barring mechanical error, the defender's intention to claim
More information about the Blml