[BLML] claim law organization

Gordon Rainsford gordonrainsford at btinternet.com
Sat Mar 24 11:25:33 CET 2012



On 22/03/2012 17:39, Robert Frick wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Mar 2012 04:53:50 -0400, Gordon Rainsford
> <gordonrainsford at btinternet.com>  wrote:
>
>> On 20/03/2012 17:33, Robert Frick wrote:
>>> Simplifying a hand from today. Declarer claims, saying the board is
>>> good.
>>> She is in fact in her hand. In hand, she has two good spades and two bad
>>> diamonds. Everyone at the table knows the spades are good and everyone
>>> knows she knows the spades are good. So I give her the two spade tricks.
>>> (She has two small diamonds and the suit has only been played once.)
>>>
>>> But if she claimed saying her hand was good, then I would have made her
>>> lead a diamond (and lose the remaining 4 tricks).
>> That's because we wouldn't know that she knows the spades are good and
>> the diamonds are not.
> I am looking at the law "The director shall not accept from claimer any
> successful line of play not embraced inthe original clarification
> statement if there is an alternative normal line of play that would be
> less successful."
>
> Like it or not, this law makes no reference to what declarer is thinking.
>
> The cards are exactly the same. How can leading sometimes be normal and
> sometimes not be normal?
>
> Or are you disagreeing with the first ruling?
I am looking at the law that says "In ruling on a contested claim or 
concession, the Director adjudicates the
result of the board as equitably as possible to both sides, but any 
doubtful point as to a claim shall be resolved against the claimer."

Since it is a given, it is not a doubtful point that she knows the 
spades are good and the diamonds are not, so it would not be normal for 
her to play the losing diamonds once she knows which hand she is in. (It 
is the subject of a WBF minute that we do not allow that part of a claim 
that includes an infraction, such as leading out of turn).

In your second case she clearly would not know which of her cards was 
good and which not, and so it would be normal for her to play them in 
any order, since she believed them all to be good. Resolving doubt 
against the claimer, we would give her the result of the least 
advantageous play of her remaining cards.


Gordon Rainsford


More information about the Blml mailing list