Join Bridge Winners
Faulty Claim Ruling

West
108765
9852
AQ83
North
2
103
AQ964
KJ1095
East
3
KQ74
J8732
742
South
AKQJ94
AJ6
K105
6
W
N
E
S
1
P
1
P
2
P
3
P
3NT
P
4NT
P
P
P
D
4NT North
NS: 0 EW: 0

Obviously there was a misunderstanding in the bidding with 3 intended as forcing and 4NT as invitational to 6NT. (After the hand, South said that he should just jump to 6)

After the 4 was led, the declarer put his hand down and said, "unless you (East) have 4-5 diamonds to the jack, I will take 12 tricks: A, 6s and 5s. If you (East) do have 4-5 diamonds to the jack, I will take 10 tricks (only three diamonds)." The director was called over and, after taking the board away for study, said that the result is down two. 

Do you agree? How would you rule on the result of the contract?

If it's important, this is at a sectional game in the Open Swiss. E/W are good defenders.

 

EDIT: To clarify, declared did NOT state anything about "testing" or "attempting" anything, besides for what was stated in the claim. The only thing I may have gotten wrong in originally stating the problem was the order in which declarer named his 12 tricks. He may have said, "I will take 12 tricks: 6 spades, 5 diamonds (unless…), and the A." He may also have said that he would twelve tricks: diamonds, spades, and heart. Does this order matter to you? Would your ruling change based on the order he named his tricks/whether he named his tricks at all? I've also added more options for going down after seeing some comments.

+2
+1
=
-1
-2
-3
-4
-5
-6

Sorry, to answer polls. Registered users can vote in polls, and can also browse other users' public votes! and participate in the discussion.

Getting results...
loading...
59 Comments
Getting Comments... loading...
.

Bottom Home Top