[bali 2]

---

S plays 6♠. W leads ♦Q, taken in dummy.
Declarer cashes ♠ Ace, then plays small ♠ for his Queen- W discards a club -. He stops a few seconds, and put his cards on the table saying : "6 or 7 dependind on the place of the ♥ K."
East objects and call TD. What is the ruling please ?

Many thanks in advance,
Al. Ohana

[bali 2]

Sorry for the hands record : the two minors Queens are in South hand ...

[Trinidad]

bali 2, on Sep 22 2009, 11:40 AM, said:

Sorry for the hands record : the two minors Queens are in South hand ...

With the minor suit queens in the South hand, I basically don't see a real problem with the claim.

Or did you mean that declarer didn't state a line, and didn't mention the outstanding trump (and wasn't aware of it since West threw a black card)?

It is well possible that South didn't know that there was still a trump out. That part is easiest to judge by the director at the table. He can see what is going on, what is said and not said and he can see the body language. Judging that from here is nearly impossible.
If it turns out that South really didn't know that there was a trump out, then we will rule 12 tricks to South. If we conclude that South did know about the outstanding trump, we give South 13 tricks.

Conclusion: NS should have been in 6NT.

Rik

[gordontd]

The wording of the relevant law is:

"L70C. There Is an Outstanding Trump
When a trump remains in one of the opponents’ hands, the Director shall
award a trick or tricks to the opponents if:
1. claimer made no statement about that trump, and
2. it is at all likely that claimer at the time of his claim was unaware that a
trump remained in an opponent’s hand, and
3. a trick could be lost to that trump by any normal play."

The phrase "at all likely" sets the standard fairly high (or low depending on which way you look at it): it's hard to see how it could be "not at all likely" that a player who has failed to play a third round of trumps and failed to mention the outstanding trump, is unaware that the trump remains out.

[PeterE]

For me the "timing" of (the time when making) the claim here is crucial. Why did declarer not claim after cashing 1 round of trumps and seeing they behave??
At that point I would have accepted the missing statement as obvious. Now I would most probably decide against the claimant and rule 12 tricks, unless declarer can managed to persuade me of his (certain) knowledge of the outstanding trump.

[bluejak]

I have adjusted the diagram. I believe by claiming after two rounds he had forgotten the trump and give 12 tricks.

[axman]

PeterE, on Sep 22 2009, 06:05 AM, said:

For me the "timing" of (the time when making) the claim here is crucial. Why did declarer not claim after cashing 1 round of trumps and seeing they behave??
At that point I would have accepted the missing statement as obvious. Now I would most probably decide against the claimant and rule 12 tricks, unless declarer can managed to persuade me of his (certain) knowledge of the outstanding trump.

Actually, what is crucial is that what was claimed, and the timing is irrelevant.



I'll point out since it is possible for E to hold stiff HK a viable line of play is for playing the HA on the first round [as is provided by L70E1. The Director shall not accept from claimer any unstated line of play the success of which depends upon finding one opponent rather than the other with a particular card, ....]

As for the status of the spade suit, declarer said nothing. As he holds so many it is conceiveable that he inaccurately believes they are in and -

L70C [When a trump remains in one of the opponents’ hands, the Director Shall award a trick or tricks to the opponents if:] clearly provides the defense with a trump trick via ruffing a third round minor.

[Trinidad]

axman, on Sep 22 2009, 04:35 PM, said:

PeterE, on Sep 22 2009, 06:05 AM, said:

For me the "timing" of (the time when making) the claim here is crucial. Why did declarer not claim after cashing 1 round of trumps and seeing they behave??
At that point I would have accepted the missing statement as obvious. Now I would most probably decide against the claimant and rule 12 tricks, unless declarer can managed to persuade me of his (certain) knowledge of the outstanding trump.

Actually, what is crucial is that what was claimed, and the timing is irrelevant.

Oh, yes it is very relevant. The point in time where declarer makes his claim reveals a lot about whether he knew that there was a trump out.

Quote

I'll point out  since it is possible for E to hold stiff HK a viable line of play is for playing the HA on the first round [as is provided by L70E1. The Director shall not accept from claimer any unstated line of play the success of which depends upon finding one opponent rather than the other with a particular card, ....]

This is plane silly. Declarer has stated that the number of tricks depended on the place of the ♥K. He didn't state that it depended on the ♥K being singleton. There is no doubt that declarer was going to take the heart finesse.

Quote

As for the status of the spade suit, declarer said nothing.  As he holds so many it is conceiveable that he inaccurately believes they are in and -

L70C [When a trump remains in one of the opponents’ hands, the Director Shall award a trick or tricks to the opponents if:] clearly provides the defense with a trump trick via ruffing a third round minor.

That all depends on whether we judge that declarer knew about the outstanding trump. This is why everybody would give 13 tricks immediately if declarer pulled one round of trumps. It would be even clearer if declarer claimed after RHO followed suit in trick 1.

Pulling precisely two rounds of trumps and then claiming is the only doubtful situation. This is why some would not give 13. And it is why I said that the table director is in the best position to judge this. If declarer would have claimed at any other point in time, this would be a no-brainer.

Rik

[iviehoff]

PeterE, on Sep 22 2009, 12:05 PM, said:

Why did declarer not claim after cashing 1 round of trumps and seeing they behave??

Since he can cope with a 4-0 trump break, he can claim as soon as E has failed to ruff at trick 1.

[jeremy69]

I would not be at all generous to the claimer. It seems clear to me that when he claimed after the second round of trumps he might well have lost track, thought west played a spade or something else careless thus he loses a trick to the outstanding trump and makes 12.

[axman]

Trinidad, on Sep 22 2009, 10:01 AM, said:

axman, on Sep 22 2009, 04:35 PM, said:

PeterE, on Sep 22 2009, 06:05 AM, said:

For me the "timing" of (the time when making) the claim here is crucial. Why did declarer not claim after cashing 1 round of trumps and seeing they behave??
At that point I would have accepted the missing statement as obvious. Now I would most probably decide against the claimant and rule 12 tricks, unless declarer can managed to persuade me of his (certain) knowledge of the outstanding trump.

Actually, what is crucial is that what was claimed, and the timing is irrelevant.

Oh, yes it is very relevant. The point in time where declarer makes his claim reveals a lot about whether he knew that there was a trump out.

Quote

I'll point out  since it is possible for E to hold stiff HK a viable line of play is for playing the HA on the first round [as is provided by L70E1. The Director shall not accept from claimer any unstated line of play the success of which depends upon finding one opponent rather than the other with a particular card, ....]

This is plane silly. Declarer has stated that the number of tricks depended on the place of the ♥K. He didn't state that it depended on the ♥K being singleton. There is no doubt that declarer was going to take the heart finesse.

Quote

As for the status of the spade suit, declarer said nothing.  As he holds so many it is conceiveable that he inaccurately believes they are in and -

L70C [When a trump remains in one of the opponents’ hands, the Director Shall award a trick or tricks to the opponents if:] clearly provides the defense with a trump trick via ruffing a third round minor.

That all depends on whether we judge that declarer knew about the outstanding trump. This is why everybody would give 13 tricks immediately if declarer pulled one round of trumps. It would be even clearer if declarer claimed after RHO followed suit in trick 1.

Pulling precisely two rounds of trumps and then claiming is the only doubtful situation. This is why some would not give 13. And it is why I said that the table director is in the best position to judge this. If declarer would have claimed at any other point in time, this would be a no-brainer.

Rik

A tautology is a tale told by an idiot full of sound and fury signifying nothing.

[gratitude to W Shakespeare]

definition, idiot: someone who knows that his score depends on the location of the HK, yet, does nothing about it.

[barmar]

I agree with Trinidad. Although the contract is safe even against a 4-0 trump break, a player might not realize this right away, and starting to draw trumps is not unreasonable. It's the fact that he continued drawing trumps, and then stopped before they were all drawn that makes it seem like he could have miscounted.

If making this ruling at the table I would feel bad for declarer, since it's not clearcut, but we're required to err on the side of the NOS.

[Trinidad]

axman, on Sep 22 2009, 06:34 PM, said:

definition, idiot:  someone who knows that his score depends on the location of the HK, yet, does nothing about it.

Definition of "non bridge player": Someone who doesn't understand that declarer cannot do anything about the location of the ♥K.

Clarification for non bridge players: The ♥K is either with RHO giving declarer N tricks or with LHO giving him N+1 tricks (after taking the finesse in hearts). In the game of bridge declarer is not allowed to apply physical force on either opponent to move the ♥K from RHO to LHO.

Glossary of terms:
♥K: pronounce: "King of hearts", second highest card in the heart suit
RHO: Right hand opponent, the opponent who is sitting on the right side of the player in question (in this case declarer, see declarer)
Declarer: The player that plays the contract and has committed to winning a specified number of tricks (see trick)
Trick: Round of card play that can either be won or lost
LHO: Left hand opponent, the opponent who is sitting on the left side of the player in question
Finesse: Highly advanced play that will win a player an extra trick if a specific card is held by a specific opponent, but not when it's held by the other opponent.

==========

But you make a good point. This is a nice idea for a new game that we could call "American Footbridge" (or, if you are British, "Rugbridge") where it would be allowed to use physical force to move cards from one player to another. "American Footbridge" might appeal to physically fitter people with slightly violent tendencies. It also would make great TV. I can already hear the commentators:

"Aaaand we're back with Monday Night Footbridge... Only two seconds left in the round.. What will the Vikings do now? Brett Farve is going for the hail Mary. The deuce is flying, flying, ... The hearts are lining up in the end zone... the deuce is flying to the queen and .... It's intercepted by RHO's king! The Dallas Aces beat the Viki... Wait, folks.. Wait... There is a flag on the table...A flag near dummy's bidding box... The TD is consulting some players...This may take a while for the officials to sort out...Well, Brother Lucius, let's go to BBO movie to get the replay...Oh, I see the TD has made a ruling already.... He rules interference...It's interference! Automatic overtrick!! Automatic overtriiiick!!!!! Vikings wiiiiiinnnnn!"

Oh, I am so looking forward to Thanksgiving. Thanks for the wonderful suggestion.

Rik