Re: Claim

Exactly Richard, you can copy the law perfectly.
And how does that help us?
What is the doubtful point?
If we find that playing a small trump is a normal line, then the doubt 
as to whether claimer will play that line is resolved against him, and 
he loses an extra trick.
But if we find that this is not a normal line, then there is no doubt 
that claimer will lose just the top trump.

Now if you believe that since there is doubt as to whether it is a 
normal line or not, we should resolve that doubt against claimer, then 
you are, IMHO, going too far. Because it would just require any piece of 
doubt as to rule each and every claim invalid and leading to just top 
trump tricks.

What we need here is a definition of hat normal lines are, and there is 
nothing in the laws to help us there (well, nothing useful in this 
discussion, anyway).

I find that it is unhelpful to force a player to play a line he would 
"never" play. This causes aggravation.
A claimer will readily accept that you have to assume he forgot a trump, 
even when he maintains he hasn't. But a claimer will not accept that you 
make him play a silly line.

And playing the three of trumps hen holding high cards is a silly line IMO.

Herman.

Richard Hills wrote:
> Herman De Wael:
>
> .....
> I have written, for myself, a few guidelines that I apply.
>
> One of these is that claimers that believe all tricks are theirs, will
> play long suits, then high cards, only then trumps.
> And of course within these suits in any order.
> .....
>
> Richard Hills:
>
> I have not written, for everyone, a single guideline that we apply.
>
> "In ruling on a contested claim or concession, the Director adjudicates
> the result of the board as equitably as possible to both sides, but any
> doubtful point as to a claim shall be resolved against the claimer."
>
> Law 70A.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Richard Hills
>
> On Wednesday, November 30, 2016, Herman De Wael <[email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>
>     We must assume that claimer forgot the outstanding trump, right?
>
>     I have written, for myself, a few guidelines that I apply.
>
>     One of these is that claimers that believe all tricks are theirs, will
>     play long suits, then high cards, only then trumps.
>     And of course within these suits in any order.
>     So the normal plays in this lay-out are
>     - playing two round of clubs, finishing with two trumps;
>     - playing the spade and a club;
>     - playing one club, one ruff and the spade
>     In all those cases defenders get just one trick.
>
>     That would be my ruling.
>
>     Herman.
>
>     Robert Frick wrote:
>      >         --
>      >         --
>      >         --
>      >         AQJx
>      >
>      > --
>      > Q
>      > 98
>      > x
>      >
>      >          10
>      >          32
>      >          --
>      >          x
>      >
>      >
>      > Hearts are trump, declarer claims the rest. With no claiming
>     statement, but he states at the table that he will play a club to
>     the board, come back to his hand, and his last two cards are good.
>     The spade is good.
>      >
>      > So far, an easy ruling. I let him play this out, so he can see
>     how this plays out for losing two tricks, and when he said he would
>     ruff a club, with all cards visible, defender said she would overfuff.
>      >
>      > "The Director may accept it as evidence of the players' probably
>     lays subsequent to the claim." Right, there is no way he can lose
>     more than one trick if she defends that way.
>      > _______________________________________________
>      > Blml mailing list
>      > [email protected] <javascript:;>
>      > http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
>     <http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml>
>      >
>      >
>      > -----
>      > No virus found in this message.
>      > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
>      > Version: 2016.0.7924 / Virus Database: 4664/13499 - Release Date:
>     11/29/16
>      >
>      >
>     _______________________________________________
>     Blml mailing list
>     [email protected] <javascript:;>
>     http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
>     <http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Blml mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
>
>
>
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
> Version: 2016.0.7924 / Virus Database: 4664/13523 - Release Date: 12/02/16
>
_______________________________________________
Blml mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml