[jillybean]

OleBerg, on Jun 18 2009, 12:06 PM, said:

Codo, on Jun 18 2009, 08:32 AM, said:

<snip>

Why should I break the clearly written rules?

<snip>

Because:

1) You came to enjoy the game.
2) Many TD's suck.

1) The enjoyment I get comes from playing the best game I can, not from playing pussy with the opps.

2) The TD's competance is irrelevant, he or she is the only one authorized to make a ruling.

[benlessard]

Ive gave him more then 10 seconds to finish the claim. I felt that this was too much.

The hand was

Scoring: MP

---

They lead a S and east played the Q. So put all his trumps on the table (probably thinking he had too many tricks.

[Lobowolf]

I'd definitely give him more than 10 seconds. Claims are generally encouraged, anyway, and it's saving time vs. the time he'd spend playing out 12 more tricks. While the clarification "should" be made at once, there's no penalty set forth if it's not. What's the alternative? Play can't resume; that much IS clear from the rules. Average minus? Make up a line of play on his behalf?

[OleBerg]

jillybean2, on Jun 18 2009, 10:19 PM, said:

OleBerg, on Jun 18 2009, 12:06 PM, said:

Codo, on Jun 18 2009, 08:32 AM, said:

<snip>

Why should I break the clearly written rules?

<snip>

Because:

1) You came to enjoy the game.
2) Many TD's suck.

1) The enjoyment I get comes from playing the best game I can, not from playing pussy with the opps.

2) The TD's competance is irrelevant, he or she is the only one authorized to make a ruling.

In short:


My opinion:

Common sense > Rules.


Your opininon:

Common sense < Rules.

[Codo]

Echognome, on Jun 19 2009, 02:19 AM, said:

"At once" is pretty clear too. Look, there's always going to be some gray areas when interpreting rules. Heck, you can just go over to the bridgetalk forums and see all the debates. My point is that the regulations are set and the TD's enforce them. But that doesn't mean you have to play the game to the strict letter of the law all the time. I can give you many, many examples where this is all meted out in real life. A simple one is whether you ever break the speed limit? If a police officer sees you going five miles an hour over the speed limit, will he stop you? Or does he give you some reasonable leeway? We all have to judge what we can bend and what we cannot. Some things we view as black and white and others view as gray.

I can assure that although TD's will carry out the bridge laws in a complete and fair manner when called, they will also turn a blind eye with many smaller infractions. Where they draw the line depends on their own views.

Pretty clear is not the same as a demand. "Should at once" is surely a lesser demand then "play ceases". There is not even a rule which states how long is "at once".? One second? 1/2 a second? 3 seconds?
But there is no grey area about "ceases".

[Codo]

OleBerg, on Jun 19 2009, 04:06 AM, said:

Codo, on Jun 18 2009, 08:32 AM, said:

<snip>

Why should I break the clearly written rules?

<snip>

Because:

1) You came to enjoy the game.
2) Many TD's suck.

And I enjoy more of the game when I make my own set of rules?

Or do I have more joy when I let someone play a hand out after I saw his cards?

Funny, I take my joy from other parts of the game.

And TDs don't suck where I play. They sometimes err but over all they do a great job.

[JoAnneM]

I may have misread the first post. The declarer didn't actually say he had a communication problem, he just slowed down the claim. He may have just been assuring himself that the claim was good. I don't think there is any rule that covers that. However I equate it with the bidding box - don't go there until you know what you are going to do.

[blackshoe]

benlessard, on Jun 18 2009, 03:22 PM, said:

Ive gave him more then 10 seconds to finish the claim. I felt that this was too much. 

The hand was

Dealer: ????? Vul: ???? Scoring: MP

♠ KTxxx ♥ xxx ♦ T9xx ♣ Q ♠ AJ ♥ AKQJxx ♦ KJ ♣ AKx

They lead a S and east played the Q. So put all his trumps on the table (probably thinking he had too many tricks.

I infer from Ben's second post that the contract was 6 or 7♥. So. ♠A, draw trumps, ♠J, ♣Q, ♠KT, pitching ♦KJ, hand's good. Wtp?

Lobowolf said:

What's the alternative? Play can't resume; that much IS clear from the rules. Average minus? Make up a line of play on his behalf?

That's up to the TD, not the players. And both of those alternatives are illegal. Although I suppose you could call the TD's judgement as to how the play would go, in the absence of a claim statement, as "making up a line of play" if you want to be argumentative.

Oleberg said:

My opinion:

Common sense > Rules.

Your opininon:

Common sense < Rules.

I'm with Jilly on this one. Besides, who's going to determine whose brand of "common sense" is going to govern? You?

If the TD sucks where you play, go play somewhere else. Or become a TD and do the job yourself.

echognome said:

I can assure that although TD's will carry out the bridge laws in a complete and fair manner when called, they will also turn a blind eye with many smaller infractions. Where they draw the line depends on their own views.

In practice true. However, one can hope that the TD's opinion is informed by understanding of the laws and regulations, and of common TD practice. In spite of players' arguments about "common sense".

JoAnneM said:

I may have misread the first post. The declarer didn't actually say he had a communication problem, he just slowed down the claim. He may have just been assuring himself that the claim was good. I don't think there is any rule that covers that. However I equate it with the bidding box - don't go there until you know what you are going to do.

Generally speaking, good advice. But having laid down(some of) his cards, it's up to the TD to resolve the situation.

The law says a claim should be accompanied "at once" (which, according to my dictionary, means "immediately" or, as Starbuck might put it "right frackin' now"). If at the time the TD is called the claimer has not made a statement. the TD should investigate whether the claimer was given adequate time to state his line. If not, or if he had started to state it and was interrupted (has happened to me several times) then he should be allowed to state or finish stating it. That's not specifically enumerated in the laws — you might call it "common sense". I call it "good TD practice". Then the TD must adjudicate the claim, statement or no statement, in accordance with Law 69 or 70, as appropriate.

[jdonn]

Ah, so common sense is fine to use as long as you call it something else like "common TD practice" or "good TD practice".

I think it's a straw man to ask whose common sense will govern. In this situation it is obviously that of the opponents of the claimant. No one else has to agree with them or not, it doesn't matter.

[skjaeran]

Declarer obviously have all the tricks, as long as he keeps a trump in hand as communication back to hand for the last two club trick.

Just as obviously, declarer didn't realize this, and was about to pull all his trumps (he already had put them on the table before he discovered his problem). Believing he's got tricks to spare.

As a TD I'd hold him to his play of all the trumps. Thus, I'd award him 13 tricks if spades broke 3-3, else just 11 tricks.

[blackshoe]

jdonn, on Jun 19 2009, 12:51 PM, said:

Ah, so common sense is fine to use as long as you call it something else like "common TD practice" or "good TD practice".

I think it's a straw man to ask whose common sense will govern. In this situation it is obviously that of the opponents of the claimant. No one else has to agree with them or not, it doesn't matter.

Well, then I guess we don't need TDs at all.

[Lobowolf]

skaeran, on Jun 19 2009, 01:32 PM, said:

Declarer obviously have all the tricks, as long as he keeps a trump in hand as communication back to hand for the last two club trick.

Just as obviously, declarer didn't realize this, and was about to pull all his trumps (he already had put them on the table before he discovered his problem). Believing he's got tricks to spare.

As a TD I'd hold him to his play of all the trumps. Thus, I'd award him 13 tricks if spades broke 3-3, else just 11 tricks.

I think that requiring declarer to keep "drawing" trump after both opponents show out goes well beyond careless and into irrational, particularly since the pause reveals that he's already figured out that transportation is an issue.

[blackshoe]

Laying down cards is not equivalent to stating a line of play, unless the claimer is clearly doing so to indicate the order in which he will play.

It is not obvious to me what declarer did and did not realize. I think you're making unwarranted assumptions, skaeran. And lobo is dead on.

[Fluffy]

I love to let declarer think, play what he would if he didn't claim actually. And be nice.

But dude, when I play a tournament with big money prices and I am fighting for them I won't be so livelly any more. The director will be summoned and whatever I can grab I will try to get.

Yeah, I know there are many proffesionals who would be nice, guess what?, they probably don't need the money price so much, but I do.

[jdonn]

blackshoe, on Jun 19 2009, 01:49 PM, said:

jdonn, on Jun 19 2009, 12:51 PM, said:

Ah, so common sense is fine to use as long as you call it something else like "common TD practice" or "good TD practice".

I think it's a straw man to ask whose common sense will govern. In this situation it is obviously that of the opponents of the claimant. No one else has to agree with them or not, it doesn't matter.

Well, then I guess we don't need TDs at all.

Sure we do! I have no idea what the penalties are for a revoke discovered after the hand, I'd like someone to complain to if jlall throws a bottle of pepsi at my head, and besides they come in handy when you can't find the caddy. See they have plenty to do.

[matmat]

jdonn, on Jun 19 2009, 03:09 PM, said:

I'd like someone to complain to if jlall throws a bottle of pepsi at my head,

How many times has this happened?

[jdonn]

matmat, on Jun 19 2009, 03:50 PM, said:

jdonn, on Jun 19 2009, 03:09 PM, said:

I'd like someone to complain to if jlall throws a bottle of pepsi at my head,

How many times has this happened?

None, I credit the deterrent effect of having directors around.