Law69B Withdrawing an acceptance of a claim
On page 200 of his book, Jacob Duschek describes the following position
If a pair has accepted an opponent’s claim, they get those tricks back that they would likely have made in practical play
For example, if declarer has claimed the rest and defenders have accepted “likely” simply means that if normal (in the common sense of the word) and sound defence would secure a trick for the defenders, they will get trick back.
But if a good declarer would make the rest with a likely line of play, the defenders would not get that trick, not even if the director would clearly have given them the trick if they hadn’t accepted the claim initially. In this case, the concept of of a “normal” line of play does not apply to either side.
Please can anyone help me unpack this difference between TD giving defenders “trick if they hadn’t accepted the claim initially” vs defenders not getting trick back on later claim “if good declarer make the rest with likely line of play”
I would love to see an example deal where this might apply
Comments
The standard for judging claims is initially very high. My paper at https://www.ebu.co.uk/documents/laws-and-ethics/adjudicating-claims.pdf says "We are told that any doubtful points should be ruled against the claimer,
which is a very high standard indeed. So if you aren’t sure, you rule against the claimer."
This means if you think that the claimer would probably have got it right if it had been played out, but there is a chance that they would not, then you do not give them the benefit of being correct. By contrast, if the claim was initially accepted and the defenders later see there was an element of doubt, this is not enough to rule against the claimer.
Ah, thank you that is very helpful.
In your paper you also expand on what is meant by "class" to include such ideas as "propensity to aggression"
Am I correct to interpret aggression in this context as "boldness" rather than hostility or belligerence?
Yes :)