BBO Discussion Forums: Late claims I - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Late claims I two of them

#1 User is offline   FrancesHinden 

  • Limit bidder
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 8,476
  • Joined: 2004-November-02
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:England
  • Interests:Bridge, classical music, skiing... but I spend more time earning a living than doing any of those

Posted 2012-February-26, 11:48

Hand 1:


Declarer is in 6D by South.
He gets the ace of clubs lead and plays as follows:
ace of clubs lead ruffed
spade to the king
club ruffed
heart to the king
club ruffed
ace of diamonds
ace of spades
spade ruffed in hand
king of diamonds (discarding a spade)
heart to dummy

he is now in this position with the lead in dummy (sorry if the pips have changed a bit):


The cards are now played as follows:
Ace of hearts, queen of diamonds, 6 of hearts, 7 hearts
East plays the king of clubs and South plays the 10 of hearts, then says "you get a trump"

South, an honest citizen, admits that he hadn't seen the ruff, and thought he was following to another winning card from dummy.

How do you rule?
How do you rule if South instead says "I was claiming the last two tricks, not following to the club"
0

#2 User is offline   mrdct 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,448
  • Joined: 2003-October-27
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Moama, NSW

Posted 2012-February-26, 15:24

In both cases I rule down one.

In the initial scenario, he could change the 10 to the J if it was an unintended play and he did so without pause for thought (Law 45C4b). However, on the facts presented it was an intended play based on a misapprehension that the previous trick hadn't been ruffed that was reinforced by his attempted concession of a trump.

In the second scenario, I don't buy it - if he was claiming he wouldn't have played the 10, he would've faced his hand or otherwise indicate he was ruffing the K and taking the last trick with dummy's A.
Disclaimer: The above post may be a half-baked sarcastic rant intended to stimulate discussion and it does not necessarily coincide with my own views on this topic.
I bidding the suit below the suit I'm actually showing not to be described as a "transfer" for the benefit of people unfamiliar with the concept of a transfer
0

#3 User is offline   bluejak 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,686
  • Joined: 2007-August-23
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Liverpool, UK
  • Interests:Bridge Laws, Cats, Railways, Transport timetables

Posted 2012-February-26, 16:51

View Postmrdct, on 2012-February-26, 15:24, said:

In the initial scenario, he could change the 10 to the J if it was an unintended play and he did so without pause for thought (Law 45C4b).

Declarer can't.
David Stevenson

Merseyside England UK
EBL TD
Currently at home
Visiting IBLF from time to time
<webjak666@gmail.com>
1

#4 User is offline   blackshoe 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 16,396
  • Joined: 2006-April-17
  • Location:Rochester, NY

Posted 2012-February-26, 17:35

Law 45C4b has to do with unintended designations. There was no designation here, declarer played the 10.
--------------------
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
0

Share this topic:


Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users