[BLML] (2017) Procedure Immediately following a claim[SEC=UNOFFICIAL]
blml at arcor.de
Fri Mar 16 05:49:12 CET 2012
Nigel Guthrie <g3 at nige1.com> wrote:
> [Richard Hills]
> Contrariwise, a claim is always(1) a non-
> infraction, but the claim may be "treated
> as illegal" (but NOT become illegal, so
> the claim is NOT subject to a potential
> Law 90 PP) when the Director is ruling
> on "any doubtful point".
> This argument grows increasingly surreal.
> It is hard to believe that a director would *never* impose a penalty on the
> perpetrator of a disputed faulty claim. I fondly imagine that a brave and
> competent director might do so, when he judges that the cunning claimer
> could have well have known that his contract would certainly fail if he
> played it out and his only hope was that gullible opponents would accept a
I've seen that.
A couple of tricks into the hand, declarer noticed that
he had 12 cards, and dummy 14. Rather than call
the director, declarer made a claim, which opponents accepted.
More information about the Blml