Re: Claim

On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 08:32:20 +0100, Herman wrote:

>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.
>

Since the 3 and 2 of trumps *MUST* lose to any outstanding trump if
there is one, I think I can understand the response of Herman's
hypothetical claimer here - it *IS* a silly line to cash the last
small trump first. If the last trump was a possible high trump, it
would be a different matter. 

Brian. 
_______________________________________________
Blml mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml