[ahydra]

Declarer (South) is playing 4HX, lead is in dummy:

......♣QJ94

♥94
♦9
♣2

......♠9
......♥J106


East's cards are immaterial; dummy's clubs are high, and declarer is aware that his spade is high and of the two trumps out (including what rank they are). Pushed for time, declarer faces his hand without a claim statement but West does not accept the claim, saying that declarer might play two rounds of clubs, throwing the spade on the first and getting overruffed on the second (or promoting the ♥9). Declarer had some choice words to say about that line of play.

There is a line for all the tricks, of course (ruff the first club and draw trumps), so how do you rule?

ahydra

[blackshoe]

So much for trying to save time. Hopefully declarer will learn something from this. But he probably won't if we give him all the tricks. OTOH, if West knows declarer's skill level, his objection is a bit much.

I fall back on Fiona Glennanne's solution: "Can we shoot them?"

Legally, though, if the TD is convinced that declarer knows all those things the OP says he knows, then he awards all the tricks to declarer. In particular, if declarer knows there are two trump out, and that West has them both, declarer gets all three four tricks. If declarer does not know that, he should probably get three tricks. He gets only two tricks if the TD deems that playing two clubs, ruffing the second one low, ruffing back in, and leading the ♠9 is "normal" - which it doesn't look to me to be. If he throws the spade on the first trick, he can't lose more than one trump trick.

I would ask declarer, before defenders expose their hands, how he thinks the cards lay. In particular, how many trump are out, and where are they? Yes, West's objection gives him a clue, so I wouldn't give a lot of weight to what he says, but I do want to hear it. His "choice words" about West's suggested line of play are also germane.

This post has been edited by blackshoe: 2013-October-26, 00:32
Reason for edit: can't count. :-)

[Trinidad]

I am with Blackshoe, except that he seems to have the numbers wrong. There are still four tricks to go. If declarer knows there are two trumps out and West has them all, declarer gets all four tricks.

Rik

[blackshoe]

Yeah, four, not three. I can't count.

[barmar]

I'd want declarer to be very convincing. How hard would it have been to state "Ruffing a club back to hand and drawing the remainnig 2 trumps"? This is not a layout where the line is so obvious that just facing your hand is adequate -- the problem is that he has too many winners.

[Bbradley62]

I agree with Barry. And even if declarer does get awarded all four remaining tricks, he should get a procedural penalty for not stating a line in the first place.

Edit: And if the "choice words" include any forbidden words, he can get hit for that too.

This post has been edited by Bbradley62: 2013-October-26, 17:44

[ggwhiz]

blackshoe, on 2013-October-25, 18:45, said:

I would ask declarer, before defenders expose their hands,

Not possible at my table.

The first thing I do if an opponent claims is expose my hand but ask "How are you playing it" first. If the statement of claim is slow or awol after that there are no 2nd chances and only then is the director called. Besides I probably need to see what my partner has before I contest the claim or not.

One of our very good local players has a habit of folding his cards, putting them in the slot and say "making 5" mid hand and often pulls that act against rookies. The directors job is not to pull a non-stated line of play out of their a$$ and imo any doubts should go to the defense. The higher the skill level of the declarer, the more responsibility they have to know the rules.

[blackshoe]

IMO, when a claim is made opponents of the claimer should only expose their hands when instructed to do so by the director. See Law 70B3.

[ggwhiz]

blackshoe, on 2013-October-26, 18:02, said:

IMO, when a claim is made opponents of the claimer should only expose their hands when instructed to do so by the director. See Law 70B3.

I agree and will change my approach but don't like the idea of declarers who formulate a line of play while the director is on the way when none was stated.

[barmar]

ggwhiz, on 2013-October-26, 17:42, said:

One of our very good local players has a habit of folding his cards, putting them in the slot and say "making 5" mid hand and often pulls that act against rookies.

If he does the latter, he isn't the former, IMHO.

[ahydra]

I was West and unfortunately already showed my cards when I objected to the claim :/

Additionally I was director, so had to get another guy over to make the ruling. Nobody at the table spotted the correct line, so the ruling was one more trick to the defence, which I think is reasonable given that declarer didn't even seem to be aware of the winning line (recall the point in the Laws about adjudicating doubtful points against the claimer).

ahydra

[Cascade]

barmar, on 2013-October-26, 15:20, said:

I'd want declarer to be very convincing. How hard would it have been to state "Ruffing a club back to hand and drawing the remainnig 2 trumps"? This is not a layout where the line is so obvious that just facing your hand is adequate -- the problem is that he has too many winners.

I too want declarer to state a line in a simple situation like this.

However I think your threshold for the outstanding trump is too high. The law says "it is at all likely that claimer at the time of his claim was unaware that a trump remained in an opponent’s hand"

To me your "very convincing" seems more like "at all possible" which would be much stronger.

[blackshoe]

ggwhiz, on 2013-October-26, 17:42, said:

One of our very good local players has a habit of folding his cards, putting them in the slot and say "making 5" mid hand and often pulls that act against rookies. The directors job is not to pull a non-stated line of play out of their a$$ and imo any doubts should go to the defense. The higher the skill level of the declarer, the more responsibility they have to know the rules.

Many rookies will be intimidated enough in this situation that they will not call the director. The solution is to teach them to call the TD, and for the TD, when called, to rule on the basis that no line of play was stated, so all "normal" lines have to be considered, giving the NOS the benefit of the doubt. In addition, I would tell Mr. Good Player that he should know better than to claim without a clear line of play statement, and if he fails to do so in future he will be penalized in matchpoints or imps. Then the next time it happens, carry through on that.

[barmar]

Cascade, on 2013-October-27, 17:15, said:

The law says "it is at all likely that claimer at the time of his claim was unaware that a trump remained in an opponent’s hand"

We were told in the OP that declarer knew that there were outstanding trumps. So the question isn't whether he knows that they need to be drawn, but whether he's aware of the possibility of a trump promotion on certain lines.