|
|
Dummy: |
|
Question (from Illinois): This is hand 24 of a 32-board match. South is in a long stew, and needs 7 more tricks to make his 3NT contract. He has already taken a losing heart finesse into your jack, and he now must decide if he should finesse again or play for a drop. Meanwhile, you are being called away from the table when play ends to perform a quick tournament-chair activity. Declarer finally leads a club to dummy and you, in your haste, table your hand, expressing that you'll take the final three tricks with the heart queen and other of your good cards. The table scores down 1 and you run off on errands. Upon your return, declarer has rescinded his concession, stating that he can make the hand by running the clubs to strip your hand and then throwing you in with a diamond, forcing you to lead into the heart tenace. What score should be given? |
|
West: |
|
You: |
|
|
|
South: |
|
Stevenson:
1. There is a very important principle here: if declarer had put his hand down and said "One off", then he has conceded three tricks and claimed the remainder. But when you put your hand down and say you are taking three tricks, declarer has not conceded. You are the one making the claim, and he either agrees to it (called "Acquiescence") or does not, and contests it. Why is this so important? Because the Law on Concession [Law 71] and the Law on Acquiescence [Law 69] are quite different.
2. Initially, declarer assented to your claim. Has he acquiesced? According to the Law, he has only acquiesced if he does not object, i.e., he does not change his mind before his side makes a call on a subsequent board or before the round ends. Well, from your story, they certainly have not called on the next board, and since you returned to the table, I presume the round has not ended. So, he was in time to change his mind, and he has not acquiesced to your claim.
3. Now it is up to the Director to judge your claim. In a contested claim, the Director tries to be equitable, but doubtful points "shall be resolved against the claimer" [Law 70A]. Might declarer have played it correctly to make it? Well, we know he was not going to repeat the heart finesse because he played a club before you claimed. Interestingly, on the run of the clubs you are going to have to pitch winners!
4. I think it may come down to the bidding. While you have not given it, you have quite a few high-card points left after some cards were played. Would declarer have a good idea from the bidding how strong you were?
5. It would be reasonable for the Director to give South the benefit of the doubt if East has shown strength, and allow South to make his contract. If East's strength is unknown, then I think the Director would feel that is too unlikely a line and rule one off.
6. While you may feel a little hard done by because you had some errands to run, you must remember that is not South's fault.
7. Finally, if the round had ended before South changed his mind, a different Law applies [Law 69B]. Now, Acquiescence has occurred, and may only be withdrawn if the player has acquiesced to a trick that could not be lost by any normal play. Here, the trick easily could be lost by normal play, so if the round had ended, then the result of 3NT going off would stand.
Do you have questions about bridge laws, a ruling you
received (or made) at a tournament or club game, how to handle an ethical
dilemma? David, who is very knowledgeable on North American bridge, will
explain laws and proprieties, share opinions on specific cases and offer advice
on any aspect of game direction. You can submit questions on his web form
or by email to bridg@blakjak.com . In
your message, include a note that you're an Advocate reader from the
U.S.
David maintains an
archive of articles on laws and proprieties on his web site: http://www.blakjak.demon.co.uk/lws_menu.htm