Help
In a similar vein, be careful not to call "anything" or "any" or similar statements when calling for a discard from dummy. It gives the opponents the right to name what card they want played from dummy.
call of cards from dummy
#21
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 2,351
- Joined: 2006-March-21
- Location:North Carolina
Posted 2008-July-29, 11:21
Is the word "pass" not in your vocabulary?
So many experts, not enough X cards.
So many experts, not enough X cards.
#22
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 7,786
- Joined: 2004-September-05
- Gender:Male
- Location:Galloway NJ USA
-
Interests:Bridge, Poker, participatory and spectator sports.
Occupation - Tax Attorney in Atlantic City, NJ.
Posted 2008-July-29, 12:29
jillybean2, on Jul 27 2008, 11:41 PM, said:
blackshoe, on Jul 27 2008, 09:32 PM, said:
Quote
One hand where I was declarer I led a ♣ to xx on the table. Rho followed and I said ‘club’ while pointing up, intending my partner to play top of xx. My lho said as soon as I said ‘club’ my partner must play the lowest card, thus setting the contract. I was lucky and our opps let me play the top card, they were quite within their rights to make me play the lower and set the contract.
No they weren't. They were within their rights to call the director and ask for a ruling, but that's it.
True and if they had called the director the correct ruling is? 46B2 If declarer designates a suit but not a rank she is deemed to have called the lowest card of the suit indicated.
No.
As stated in Law 46B, if the declarer's intention as to the rank of the card to be played is incontrovertible, then it is not an incomplete designation to say "club." Declarer says that she was pointing up when she said "club" meaning high club. Assuming that the other players at the table saw that she was pointing up, then her intention to play the higher of the two club spots was "incontrovertible" and the correct ruling is that the higher of the two clubs was designated.