[BLML] Delayed challenge to a claim [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

Robert Frick rfrick at rfrick.info
Wed Nov 13 15:51:04 CET 2013

Law 65D is interesting. It starts, "A player should not disturb the order  
of his played cared until agreement has been reached on the number of  
tricks won."

Point 1. It should refer to "outcome" or tricks made, not tricks won.
Point 2. It is better than L79A1, which could be eliminated from the  

It continues, "A player who fails to comply with the provisions of this  
law jeopardizes his right to claim ownership of doubtful tricks or to  
claim (or deny) a revoke."

Point 3. In general terms, this is saying that if (1) you mix your cards,  
or agree on an outcome thereby allowing the opponents to mix their cards),  
(2) you then want to challenge the outcome, then (3) your rights are  
jeopardized for *issues concerning order of play*.

Point 4. Of course, it only says this for ownership of tricks and issues  
of a revoke. But it is not much of a stretch to apply it to a claim. When  
you agree to a claim, you have agreed to an outcome. When you then  
withdraw your agreement before the next hand starts, couldn't this be  
claiming ownership of doubtful tricks.

Point 1 explained. It is not clear than any of the tricks following a  
claim are actually won. Because play has stopped. The law: "The board is  
scored as though the tricks claimed or conceded had been won or lost in  
play." (L69A) Similarly, it seems to be natural language to say "We won 8  
tricks, plus 1 trick for the revoke, makes 9 tricks." L44 specifies a  
method of winning tricks that does not include claims or revokes.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.rtflb.org/pipermail/blml/attachments/20131113/4e91f91f/attachment.html 

More information about the Blml mailing list