[FrankerZ]

Just been playing one of the fast 4 board automated tournaments, had the following hand:



Receive a trump lead, draw in two, claim 12 tricks. Rejected. OK, maybe they don't get that I can dump a minor loser on the fourth heart. Play four rounds of hearts, discard the club, reclaim 12 tricks, note "just lose Ad" in the claim. Rejected. OK, maybe whoever has the ace of diamonds is misreading the claim and is thinking I'm claiming the rest. Lay down Kd, North takes the ace. I claim the rest. Rejected. At this point I'm bored so I just play it out.

Can we at least see *who* is rejecting a claim, rather than just that the claim is rejected? Time's short and I'd like to be able to put people who are deliberately wasting time by forcing the play out of trivial hands onto the enemies list, but I have no idea which opponent is the timewaster. Thoughts?

[0 carbon]

Maybe you are wrong. Maybe they are wrong - or just don't see it, or think you will mess up. Not a reason to Ignore them.
What bothers me is when I make a claim and it is neither accepted or rejected!

[Vampyr]

Not knowing who objects to the claim is one of the advantages of online bridge.

[morecharac]

FrankerZ, on 2021-February-02, 12:03, said:

Thoughts?

State the line of play in the claim rather than just claiming and expecting opps to see how you'll do it.

As a retired director, I'll mention two things you should keep in mind with claims.

1) When a claim is rejected, if it is reasonably possible that a non-idiot will find a losing line of play, that's what the director is supposed to rule.

2) A properly stated claim may save you from a director who (incorrectly) says to play it out when it is mathematically impossible to lose a single remaining trick no matter the line of play. Which in turn may save you being thrown off your game.

[steve2005]

What a bad idea. Suppose your claim has a flaw.
Suppose you realize there is a flaw.
I suppose if you know who is objecting you know who has the danger card that is the flaw in your plan.
This could give the claimer an unfair advantage.

[Evies Dad]

Both defenders see all the remaining cards, so you can't work out which one has the danger card based on who objects.

And they should decline anyway if your claim is unsound given any remaining permutation of cards held.

[FrankerZ]

0 carbon, on 2021-February-02, 15:09, said:

Maybe you are wrong. Maybe they are wrong - or just don't see it, or think you will mess up. Not a reason to Ignore them.

I wasn't aware that there's a specific list of reasons why a player would choose to ignore another player, and that deliberate timewasting isn't among that list

[mycroft]

Yes, both players can see it. But the person who is getting a trump trick if they play it wrong already knows that; the person with the void will take some time to work it out. It gets rejected, who's likely to have the long trumps?

[barmar]

morecharac, on 2021-February-02, 18:36, said:

State the line of play in the claim rather than just claiming and expecting opps to see how you'll do it.

That's a valid complaint about the first claim attempt, since they hadn't yet discarded the club.

But the second claim should have been accepted. There were obviously no losers other than the ♦A, and they stated that they were giving it up in the line of play.