L68 claim and continue
#1
Posted 2017-June-01, 18:50
I make one of my usual shoddy claims, tabling my cards, saying "They're all good"
West suggests that play should continue. We all shrug and agree.
Can I pick up my cards? 68D does not say.
#2
Posted 2017-June-01, 19:42
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
#3
Posted 2017-June-01, 21:06
shevek, on 2017-June-01, 18:50, said:
I make one of my usual shoddy claims, tabling my cards, saying "They're all good"
West suggests that play should continue. We all shrug and agree.
Can I pick up my cards? 68D does not say.
But of course you know never to agree. It can never be in your favour to do so.
#4
Posted 2017-June-01, 22:22
Vampyr, on 2017-June-01, 21:06, said:
Is that right?
The prior claim is now void, so surely I can start finessing. It's the defenders who should avoid playing on.
Also, my particular defenders may put up sub-standard defence, even if they have seen my cards.
Some years ago, an opponent played 6♠, finding QJxx behind AKT9x in a 5-4 fit.
He cashed ♠A and conceded one off. My partner said "play on". (We didn't know any better)
Declarer stumbled into the trump endplay for +1430.
#6
Posted 2017-June-02, 01:03
pran, on 2017-June-01, 23:26, said:
I'm not sure why that would lead you to that conclusion. And what of those who have not (yet) faced their cards?
London UK
#7
Posted 2017-June-02, 01:32
gordontd, on 2017-June-02, 01:03, said:
The reference to Law 50 is meaningless unless faced cards shall remain faced.
There is no requirement on players (other than the one making a claim or a concession) to face their cards.
#8
Posted 2017-June-02, 02:28
pran, on 2017-June-02, 01:32, said:
Not so, since we are told it does not apply, and were it to apply it would apply (differently) to faced cards and unfaced cards.
London UK
#9
Posted 2017-June-02, 02:28
shevek, on 2017-June-01, 22:22, said:
The prior claim is now void, so surely I can start finessing. It's the defenders who should avoid playing on.
Also, my particular defenders may put up sub-standard defence, even if they have seen my cards.
OK? I was under the impression that by "shoddy" you meant that your claim statement was inadequate, not that your claim was incorrect.
But suppose the claim were correct. Then it is only you who have something to lose. Playing against a Belgian side...
#11
Posted 2017-June-02, 03:05
pran, on 2017-June-02, 02:55, said:
It doesn't apply! That's the point! How you can get from there to saying that you have to leave your cards on the table if you happen to have faced them is not obvious to me.
London UK
#12
Posted 2017-June-02, 08:15
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
#14
Posted 2017-June-02, 11:07
And the reference to Law 16 means that the faced cards are not UI to partner. If declarer agrees to play on, he should know that he's effectively allowing the non-claiming defender to play double dummy. But so is declarer -- the only player who doesn't know all the cards is the claimer.
#15
Posted 2017-June-02, 14:06
barmar, on 2017-June-02, 11:07, said:
I think that this is already obvious from
Law 49 said:
#16
Posted 2017-June-02, 15:26
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.
#17
Posted 2017-June-03, 04:36
weejonnie, on 2017-June-02, 15:26, said:
Whereas Law 16 [not applying] would apply if a defender says "Don't I get a trick with a spade"
"Robin Barker is a mathematician. ... All highly skilled in their respective fields and clearly accomplished bridge players."