[mr1303]

---

Spades are trumps. Lead is in the dummy (North hand).

South is declarer, and says "Dummy is high"

Both East and West simultaneously call the director at this point. How do you rule?

[duschek]

Two tricks for declarer. I do not belong to the school which says that in this case it is perfectly normal for declarer to play the ♦J before the ♦A when he claims that dummy is high.

[pran]

duschek, on Oct 23 2009, 10:11 PM, said:

Two tricks for declarer. I do not belong to the school which says that in this case it is perfectly normal for declarer to play the ♦J before the ♦A when he claims that dummy is high.

Sustained.

Sven

[gordontd]

How do you get to two tricks?

If you don't make declarer lead the DJ first, then the defenders only get one trick.

If you do make declarer lead the DJ first, then they get all three.

Or have I missed something?

[edited a few minutes later] Oops, yes, now I see - I was thinking in terms of tricks to the defenders, you were both talking about tricks to declarer.

[Trinidad]

gordontd, on Oct 23 2009, 11:35 PM, said:

How do you get to two tricks?

If you don't make declarer lead the DJ first, then the defenders only get one trick.

If you do make declarer lead the DJ first, then they get all three.

Or have I missed something?

Maybe you missed that he wrote: "Two tricks for declarer."

(Or maybe I missed that he edited his post.)

Rik

[Jlall]

0 tricks for declarer, if he thinks all the cards in dummy are high he can play any of them equally, so I would force him to play the DJ from dummy.

[karlson]

Jlall, on Oct 23 2009, 02:10 PM, said:

0 tricks for declarer, if he thinks all the cards in dummy are high he can play any of them equally, so I would force him to play the DJ from dummy.

What, really? If I have AKQxxx in dummy and xxx in my hand and cash one round and then say dummy's high, there's no way anyone would force me to not cash them from the top.

I admit that in this case it sounds like declarer didn't know about the DK (maybe more context would make it clear), but I think playing DA then DJ is clearly irrational (which is the relevant wording if I recall correctly), so I'd allow him to luck out and take the rest.

[mrdct]

I'm with Justin on this one. If declarer believes dummy is high it would not be illogical to play ♦J before the ♦A. I sometimes play equal honours from the bottom myself; particularly if dummy has gone for a smoke as it's not as far to reach. The fact that ♦Kxx are missing means that declared must believe in his mind the the A & J are equal. If it had only been stiff ♦K missing, then obviously declarer's intent would be to play ♦A first.

[Jlall]

karlson, on Oct 23 2009, 05:26 PM, said:

What, really? If I have AKQxxx in dummy and xxx in my hand and cash one round and then say dummy's high, there's no way anyone would force me to not cash them from the top.

I agree with this, but that is a totally different scenario.

As mrdct said if there was only stiff K of diamonds out and someone claimed dummy was high I would give it to them. That is the analagous situation to what you said.

Here it is clear that declarer just forgot the DK was out and thought the ace and jack were high. In that case why would he play the ace rather than the jack?

[blackshoe]

You know, I don't think I've ever actually seen anyone play the Jack before the Ace in this scenario. Natheless, the laws tell us to give the benefit of the doubt to claimer's opponents, so that's what I'd do.

As for "forcing", sorry, I left my thumbscrews in my other suit.

[karlson]

Quote

In that case why would he play the ace rather than the jack?

Just because even someone who's been playing bridge for 15 minutes realizes that to take all the tricks, playing the J before the A can never be better.

[Jlall]

karlson, on Oct 23 2009, 05:58 PM, said:

Quote

In that case why would he play the ace rather than the jack?

Just because even someone who's been playing bridge for 15 minutes realizes that to take all the tricks, playing the J before the A can never be better.

Yes, and playing the J is never worse than playing the A if they are equal. Thus they can play either.

I guess your point is that people should always get credit for cashing the highest card in a suit first and that doing anything else is illogical.

My point is that if both plays are equal, neither is illogical. The fact that you may have forgotten something so you should cash the ace first is not a good enough reason to get credit for playing the highest card first; you are claiming which implies you know the layout without a doubt.

FWIW I thought this was a well covered situation and that my view was mainstream. If I am wrong I am eager to learn so.

[TylerE]

I'd say for a player at your level your statement might be accurate. For most players, playing from the top is beyond automatic. Spliting too many hairs on this kind of ruling is the kind of thing that drives some club players to never ever claim, and to get all out of joint when someone claims against them.

[karlson]

Jlall, on Oct 23 2009, 03:20 PM, said:

FWIW I thought this was a well covered situation and that my view was mainstream. If I am wrong I am eager to learn so.

Well since blackshoe seems to agree with you on that, I instafold.

Still just seems more fair to me to always let them cash the highest cards first.

[blackshoe]

I said I'd give the benefit of the doubt to claimer's opponents. If we're talking about beginners, or people who don't think beyond "top down", there would be no doubt they'd play top down. Since there was no indication in the OP that the players concerned were of that ilk, I'd say there's doubt.

[mr1303]

NS have been playing for 20+ years (but couldn't really be described as experts).

As to the way the play had gone, South had taken a couple of diamond finesses (he was initially missing both diamond honours), having lost the first round to the queen, and the second round holding. However, he would have no particular reason to expect the king to fall on the next round.

[Trinidad]

When a claim is doubtful, in The Netherlands TDs are instructed that tricks are by default cashed from the top and that discards (and ruffs) are by default done with the lowest card.

I am very happy with this instruction. It means that there is uniformity in the rulings and in over 99% of the cases this is what would have happened at the table if the deal would have been played out.

Rik

[Grazy69]

Rik
The above TD instructions are excellent and remove ambiguity in rulings of this type.
Out of interest do you have a link to "instructions to TD's" in your country ?
It would make a good read and compare with the UK's "White Book"
Thx

[mr1303]

TD at our table ruled 3 tricks to the defence, deciding that since declarer had thought dummy was high, he could play the jack of diamonds off the dummy.

It does appear that some proper guidance is needed on claims of this type, since opinion seems to differ depending on who you ask.

[pran]

mr1303, on Oct 24 2009, 02:14 PM, said:

TD at our table ruled 3 tricks to the defence, deciding that since declarer had thought dummy was high, he could play the jack of diamonds off the dummy.

It does appear that some proper guidance is needed on claims of this type, since opinion seems to differ depending on who you ask.

Is this ruling really consistent with your White book?

I believed EBU had the (natural?) rule that when adjudicating claims without a complete claim statement then (subject to the claim statement given) each individual suit should be played top down, but the suits should be played in the order (if any) that is most successful for opponents.

regards Sven