bridgetalk.com forums :: Laws & Rulings

Shuffler

Making six! ( 23:25:12 SatJun 14 2003 )

Country: USA

ACBL - USA

I have a player with over 800 MP's that constantly comments after the opening lead is faced: "Making six!" or "Making 4." Can I consider such statements as a claim? How about comments during the hand when he doesn't consider it a claim. He is not always right. It is intimidating to beginners.

Thanks for your help.

Shuffler

player

80 posts
bridgetalk member

Re: Making six! ( 07:44:25 SunJun 15 2003 )

Challenge her to state a line. Call the director if you disagree.

172 posts
Forum Host

Reply

Re: Making six! ( 08:34:45 SunJun 15 2003 )

The challenge is not necessary. Law 68A is quite clear: "Any statement to the effect that a contestant will win a specific number of tricks is a claim of those tricks." Law 68D says "After any claim or concession, play ceases. All play subsequent to a claim or concession shall be voided by the Director. If the claim or concession is acquiesced in, Law�69 applies; if it is disputed by any player (dummy included), the Director must be summoned immediately to apply Law�70 or Law�71, and no action may be taken pending the Director's arrival."

So. When this happens, call the Director, who will rule on the claim according to, probably, Law 70, which says in part "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, unless an opponent failed to follow to the suit of that card before the claim was made, or would subsequently fail to follow to that suit on any normal line of play; or unless failure to adopt this line of play would be irrational."

One time oughta do it.

Two other points: it doesn't matter whether the player considers his comments a claim or not - if he says he gonna when a specific number of tricks, it's a claim. Also, this is law, not regulation - it applies everywhere, not just in the ACBL.

bluejak

427 posts
Forum Host

Reply

Re: Making six! ( 15:34:26 SunJun 15 2003 )

Opinions differ as to whether this constitutes a claim. The problem is in the wording.

Quote: Law 68A

Any statement to the effect that a contestant will win a specific number of tricks is a claim of those tricks. A contestant also claims when he suggests that play be curtailed, or when he shows his cards (unless he demonstrably did not intend to claim).

The question is whether the clause "unless he demonstrably did not intend to claim" applies to the whole Law or only the second sentence. After all, we know perfectly well that he did not intend to claim.

I doubt that most TDs would treat this as a claim. It seems unfair and unnecessary.

That does not mean that I do not suggest you call the TD, or that the TD will not deal with it. It is a clear breach of various other Laws, mainly 74B2, but also 74A2, and possible 74C3 or 74C2.

Quote: Law 74B2

As a matter of courtesy a player should refrain from:
2. making gratuitous comments during the auction and play.

The important thing is that this player needs to be dealt firmly! No doubt the TD will give him a firm warning or two, and apply PPs from then on if the player does not mend his ways.

---
David Stevenson <laws2@blakjak.com>
Liverpool, England, UK
http://blakjak.com/lws_menu.htm

172 posts
Forum Host

Reply

Re: Making six! ( 22:51:27 SunJun 15 2003 )

Quote: bluejak at 15:34:26 Sun Jun 15 2003

Opinions differ as to whether this constitutes a claim. The problem is in the wording.

Quote: Law 68A

Any statement to the effect that a contestant will win a specific number of tricks is a claim of those tricks. A contestant also claims when he suggests that play be curtailed, or when he shows his cards (unless he demonstrably did not intend to claim).

The question is whether the clause "unless he demonstrably did not intend to claim" applies to the whole Law or only the second sentence. After all, we know perfectly well that he did not intend to claim.

I'm not a professional grammarian, but it is my understanding that the parenthetical clause in the law applies only to the second sentence at best, and possibly only to the second clause ("or when he shows his cards") of that sentence.

James Vickers

Re: Making six! ( 12:41:05 TueJun 17 2003 )

Country: UK

Players at my club, my partner being a particularly serious offender, have the tendency to comment on the suitability of the contract as soon as dummy goes down. They are not attempting to claim, nor do they say in so many words how many tricks they think they can make, but say something like:

"I think we've missed a slam, partner!"

I complain that such comments could easily mislead the defence into the wrong line of play, and even if it helps the defence, they do not necessarily appreciate such extraneous assistance. I pay my money to play bridge, not bridge-with-extra-helpful-comments, and I want to pit my wits against other players on equal terms.

However, my complaints only meet with looks of incompehension, and since the other major offender at the club is often the director, calling the TD will not help.

Any suggestions as to what I can do, other than find a new partner and a new club?

James

bluejak

427 posts
Forum Host

Reply

Re: Making six! ( 13:15:50 TueJun 17 2003 )

If you cannot deal with partner and the Director is at fault you have problems!

However, printing out this thread and offering tio to the two offenders may help.

---
David Stevenson <laws2@blakjak.com>
Liverpool, England, UK
http://blakjak.com/lws_menu.htm

An Observer

Re: Making six! ( 09:59:02 FriJun 20 2003 )

Country: England

I'm not a professional grammarian

Ed, I think you need to bear in mind that the people who formed the laws of bridge weren't either. Nor were they legal experts.

In all probability parenthetical qualification of the Law applies to the last part of the sentence, insofar as players can inadvertently expose their hand to either opponents depending on seating arrangements, body postures or even physical disabilities or impairments.

However, it would be a very tough TD who applied the law (as it stands :smile:

smile: without allowing the "offending" player to demonstrate that they ...did not intend to claim. Inevitably, the TD must be called.

I would emphasise that which has already been said, that the severity of the penalty levelled against the "offender" can only reflect the number of times that the TD is called to deal with said "offender".

6 bridge player(s) online in the last 15 minutes - 1 bridgetalk member(s), 0 incognito and 5 guest(s).
(The most ever was 52 09:45:43 Fri Feb 14 2003)
bluejak

Total Members: 393, Newest Member: edm.

International Bridge Laws Forum

If you need help with the Laws or rulings from
any country in the world, this is the place!

Hosted by David Stevenson
Senior Consultant Director
English Bridge Union

International Bridge Laws Forum

If you need help with the Laws or rulings from any country in the world, this is the place!Hosted by David StevensonSenior Consultant DirectorEnglish Bridge Union

If you need help with the Laws or rulings from
any country in the world, this is the place!

Hosted by David Stevenson
Senior Consultant Director
English Bridge Union