BBO Discussion Forums: Multiple repetition of a claim - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

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

Multiple repetition of a claim

#1 User is offline   misiurek 

  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1
  • Joined: 2021-October-27

Posted 2021-October-27, 08:09

In individual tournaments, a boorish player, when he plays a very bad contract, may repeatedly claim a favorable number of tricks for him. Of course, the opponents reject the claim, but when time is over, they all receive 50%. I suggest that you can claim 1 time in a hand.
0

#2 User is offline   mycroft 

  • Secretary Bird
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 7,059
  • Joined: 2003-July-12
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Calgary, D18; Chapala, D16

Posted 2021-October-27, 09:17

I claim all-but-one-trick (top trump, say), and it gets blindly rejected by the opponent who has the trump. Okay, they didn't read my claim statement; fine. I'll play a couple more tricks until they take said trump. Then I want to claim again. I shouldn't be able to?

The answer to this is the same as the answer to many claim issues - defenders are allowed to claim, or the director can be called, or declarer can prove their line. If they reject (or don't give defenders time to make) the defensive claim, and won't prove their line (note: the Law doesn't like that, but the Law doesn't say "claim again with increased frustration and see if it's accepted this time" either), then call the director. If there's no director, then it's likely one of those speedballs where the A= gets changed quickly by double-dummy analysis to a reasonable result. If not, then it's probably a tournament you don't want to play in again, yes?

Remember, for every "boorish player" who just repeatedly makes their bum claim, there's one who will repeatedly reject good claims because "what about my diamond?" Even if the answer is obviously "I have 8 of the last 6 tricks in black suits. You never see your diamond". At least some of said "boorish players" are used to some of the "auto-deniers" and don't realize this time they're wrong.
When I go to sea, don't fear for me, Fear For The Storm -- Birdie and the Swansong (tSCoSI)
0

#3 User is offline   pescetom 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 7,204
  • Joined: 2014-February-18
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Italy

Posted 2021-October-27, 15:13

Another alternative is to eliminate claims altogether and use a (public and relatively simple) 'playout' algorithm instead.
When declarer is sure that the algorithm will take all possible remaining tricks, he hits the 'playout' button, play ceases and everyone accepts the result.
Even further from the laws of contract bridge than the BBO solution? Certainly. But I think there is a case for it in an electronic world.
It meets the underlying objectives of claims (save time, eliminate redundant play) and the criteria of nige1 (simple, easily understood, no dilemmas for TDs).
0

#4 User is offline   pilowsky 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,622
  • Joined: 2019-October-04
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Israel

Posted 2021-October-27, 23:19

View Postpescetom, on 2021-October-27, 15:13, said:

Another alternative is to eliminate claims altogether and use a (public and relatively simple) 'playout' algorithm instead.
When declarer is sure that the algorithm will take all possible remaining tricks, he hits the 'playout' button, play ceases and everyone accepts the result.
Even further from the laws of contract bridge than the BBO solution? Certainly. But I think there is a case for it in an electronic world.
It meets the underlying objectives of claims (save time, eliminate redundant play) and the criteria of nige1 (simple, easily understood, no dilemmas for TDs).


When playing against robots I claim early and claim often.
Sometimes there is a clear winning line that I can't see but which satisfies the robot algorithm.


The same applies IRL. As you may be aware, some (never me of course) people stuff up cold contracts.
0

#5 User is online   paulg 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 5,052
  • Joined: 2003-April-26
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scottish Borders

Posted 2021-October-28, 01:51

Report the boorish players to the TD or BBO. If there is a pattern of this behaviour then the player is probably cheating rather than a one-off mistaken claim.
The Beer Card

I don't work for BBO and any advice is based on my BBO experience over the decades
0

#6 User is offline   pescetom 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 7,204
  • Joined: 2014-February-18
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Italy

Posted 2021-October-28, 15:29

View Postpilowsky, on 2021-October-27, 23:19, said:

When playing against robots I claim early and claim often.
Sometimes there is a clear winning line that I can't see but which satisfies the robot algorithm.


The same applies IRL. As you may be aware, some (never me of course) people stuff up cold contracts.


It's one obvious objection to my 'playout' proposal, weaker players could use it as a crutch to achieve a less bad score than they deserve.
Just as the strongest players might not trust it when declarer and imagine that they were denied some brilliant play when defender.
OTOH weaker players with potential to improve might learn from the mechanism, and stronger players might still prefer to not risk stuffing up cold contracts.
There might be a case for differentiating the algorithm according to level of competition.
0

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