Help
EBU pairs event. Contract is in no trumps. At trick 11, a defender leads a spade. Declarer has a winning spade, Ace of hearts and Queen of diamonds. Believing all three cards are winners, he claims the rest. However the QD is not a winner. Worse, if he leads the QD at trick 12, he loses two more tricks.
Since he believes all three cards are winners, should you rule that he may play them in any order thus losing two tricks?
Or is "normal play" (Law 70) that he would play the Ace first, similar to the supposition that suits are "normally" led from the top down?
Tim
Page 1 of 1
Claims query
#2
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 10,611
- Joined: 2009-September-15
- Gender:Female
- Location:London
Posted 2017-April-23, 13:05
timjand, on 2017-April-23, 13:01, said:
EBU pairs event. Contract is in no trumps. At trick 11, a defender leads a spade. Declarer has a winning spade, Ace of hearts and Queen of diamonds. Believing all three cards are winners, he claims the rest. However the QD is not a winner. Worse, if he leads the QD at trick 12, he loses two more tricks.
Since he believes all three cards are winners, should you rule that he may play them in any order thus losing two tricks?
Or is "normal play" (Law 70) that he would play the Ace first, similar to the supposition that suits are "normally" led from the top down?
Tim
Since he believes all three cards are winners, should you rule that he may play them in any order thus losing two tricks?
Or is "normal play" (Law 70) that he would play the Ace first, similar to the supposition that suits are "normally" led from the top down?
Tim
I do not think that the analogy you posit is valid, but I think it possible that declarer will play the ace first just in case he has miscounted the other suit. Not sure I would rule that way, though.
I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones -- Albert Einstein
#3
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 17,693
- Joined: 2006-April-17
- Gender:Male
- Location:Rochester, NY
Posted 2017-April-23, 13:31
He didn't make a line of play statement? I would rule he loses two tricks. "Possible" isn't good enough.
--------------------
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
#4
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 801
- Joined: 2012-April-11
- Gender:Male
- Location:North-east England
- Interests:Bridge Laws, croquet
Posted 2017-April-24, 03:11
2017 Laws
A claim should be accompanied at once by a clear statement of the line of play or defence through which the claimer proposes to win the tricks claimed, including the order in which the cards will be played. The player making the claim or concession faces his hand.
-------------------
'should' = failure to do so prejudices the rights of the person - but not often penalised. (or WTTF). There is no penalty for not facing your hand.
It seems a pretty clear case of awarding two tricks. "Normal includes careless or inferior" - note that 'irrational' at the moment only applies if declarer requires one person rather than another to hold a specific card - and vanishes entirely in the next set of laws. I assume that 'abnormal' means revoking or some such.
If anyone is interested I have cobbled together a brief introduction to the new laws Here - mainly for players and of more interest to TDs - obviously not official and my own comments, but a useful starting point.
A claim should be accompanied at once by a clear statement of the line of play or defence through which the claimer proposes to win the tricks claimed, including the order in which the cards will be played. The player making the claim or concession faces his hand.
-------------------
'should' = failure to do so prejudices the rights of the person - but not often penalised. (or WTTF). There is no penalty for not facing your hand.
It seems a pretty clear case of awarding two tricks. "Normal includes careless or inferior" - note that 'irrational' at the moment only applies if declarer requires one person rather than another to hold a specific card - and vanishes entirely in the next set of laws. I assume that 'abnormal' means revoking or some such.
If anyone is interested I have cobbled together a brief introduction to the new laws Here - mainly for players and of more interest to TDs - obviously not official and my own comments, but a useful starting point.
No matter how well you know the laws, there is always something that you'll forget. That is why we have a book.
Get the facts. No matter what people say, get the facts from both sides BEFORE you make a ruling or leave the table.
Remember - just because a TD is called for one possible infraction, it does not mean that there are no others.
In a judgement case - always refer to other TDs and discuss the situation until they agree your decision is correct.
The hardest rulings are inevitably as a result of failure of being called at the correct time. ALWAYS penalize both sides if this happens.
Get the facts. No matter what people say, get the facts from both sides BEFORE you make a ruling or leave the table.
Remember - just because a TD is called for one possible infraction, it does not mean that there are no others.
In a judgement case - always refer to other TDs and discuss the situation until they agree your decision is correct.
The hardest rulings are inevitably as a result of failure of being called at the correct time. ALWAYS penalize both sides if this happens.
#5
- Group: Members
- Posts: 43
- Joined: 2012-July-10
Posted 2017-April-24, 05:01
weejonnie, on 2017-April-24, 03:11, said:
It seems a pretty clear case of awarding two tricks.
This is what I thought too. Though it seems harsh.
Imagine this incident at the little known EBU club the Eccentrics. After a bidding mishap declarer has arrived in 6NT holding:
AKQJT9876543
K
-
-
His partner's highest card is a 6.
Inexplicably, the lead is the 2S. "The rest are mine," states an ecstatic declarer, facing his hand, but forgetting the heart loser.
The director is called. "I'm sorry, but I have to rule that you play the KH at trick 2. Score will be 11 down."
Tim :-)
#6
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 801
- Joined: 2012-April-11
- Gender:Male
- Location:North-east England
- Interests:Bridge Laws, croquet
Posted 2017-April-24, 06:27
timjand, on 2017-April-24, 05:01, said:
This is what I thought too. Though it seems harsh.
Imagine this incident at the little known EBU club the Eccentrics. After a bidding mishap declarer has arrived in 6NT holding:
AKQJT9876543
K
-
-
His partner's highest card is a 6.
Inexplicably, the lead is the 2S. "The rest are mine," states an ecstatic declarer, facing his hand, but forgetting the heart loser.
The director is called. "I'm sorry, but I have to rule that you play the KH at trick 2. Score will be 11 down."
Tim :-)
Imagine this incident at the little known EBU club the Eccentrics. After a bidding mishap declarer has arrived in 6NT holding:
AKQJT9876543
K
-
-
His partner's highest card is a 6.
Inexplicably, the lead is the 2S. "The rest are mine," states an ecstatic declarer, facing his hand, but forgetting the heart loser.
The director is called. "I'm sorry, but I have to rule that you play the KH at trick 2. Score will be 11 down."
Tim :-)
Well the lesson that players should obey (the new Law 68C) or their rights may be prejudiced will be indelibly inscribed on his memory.
C A claim should be accompanied at once by a clear statement of the line of play or defence through which the claimer proposes to win the tricks claimed, including the order in which the cards will be played. The player making the claim or concession faces his hand.
No matter how well you know the laws, there is always something that you'll forget. That is why we have a book.
Get the facts. No matter what people say, get the facts from both sides BEFORE you make a ruling or leave the table.
Remember - just because a TD is called for one possible infraction, it does not mean that there are no others.
In a judgement case - always refer to other TDs and discuss the situation until they agree your decision is correct.
The hardest rulings are inevitably as a result of failure of being called at the correct time. ALWAYS penalize both sides if this happens.
Get the facts. No matter what people say, get the facts from both sides BEFORE you make a ruling or leave the table.
Remember - just because a TD is called for one possible infraction, it does not mean that there are no others.
In a judgement case - always refer to other TDs and discuss the situation until they agree your decision is correct.
The hardest rulings are inevitably as a result of failure of being called at the correct time. ALWAYS penalize both sides if this happens.
#7
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 864
- Joined: 2014-July-30
- Gender:Male
- Location:Deventer, The Netherlands
Posted 2017-April-24, 09:25
timjand, on 2017-April-24, 05:01, said:
This is what I thought too. Though it seems harsh.
Imagine this incident at the little known EBU club the Eccentrics. After a bidding mishap declarer has arrived in 6NT holding:
AKQJT9876543
K
-
-
His partner's highest card is a 6.
Inexplicably, the lead is the 2S. "The rest are mine," states an ecstatic declarer, facing his hand, but forgetting the heart loser.
The director is called. "I'm sorry, but I have to rule that you play the KH at trick 2. Score will be 11 down."
Tim :-)
Imagine this incident at the little known EBU club the Eccentrics. After a bidding mishap declarer has arrived in 6NT holding:
AKQJT9876543
K
-
-
His partner's highest card is a 6.
Inexplicably, the lead is the 2S. "The rest are mine," states an ecstatic declarer, facing his hand, but forgetting the heart loser.
The director is called. "I'm sorry, but I have to rule that you play the KH at trick 2. Score will be 11 down."
Tim :-)
Joost
Page 1 of 1