iviehoff, on 2013-February-04, 11:12, said:
I did make one or two points I do not see that you made - one about auctions being reopened, and one about L54A. The former of those two points was repeated by Trinidad in his post immediately succeeding mine. Maybe it was cross-posted. But I'm very happy to see a post agreeing with me.
I didn't make those specific points, no. As for agreeing or disagreeing with you, let my try to clarify my position:
1. The laws do not explicitly say that claims can be made only in the play period.
2. While it makes no sense to me to allow claims before the opening lead is faced, the laws do not prohibit it.
3. If a claim is made before play starts, and it can be resolved reasonably normally, fine.
4. If such a claim cannot be resolved reasonably normally, IMO any benefit of the doubt goes to the non-claiming side. I would lean farther that way in many cases than I might if the claimer had waited for the opening lead.
5. If there is any possibility that the final contract might not be what the claimer suggested it would be, the laws give no guidance on what to do. I haven't thought this through completely, but at the moment I'd be inclined to award an ArtAS, considering the claiming side as directly at fault and the non-claiming side as in no way at fault. Can't award a procedural penalty though, since claiming outside the play period is not clearly a breach of procedure (see 1 and 2 above).
If I understand your position correctly we seem to be substantially in agreement.