[shoeless]

I have had the privilege and pleasure of playing on-line alot with a very highly ranked player in the world. One of the things that has been instructive for me is that it appears she only claims at the moment in play when she is sure the opps can see the line - to her credit, she appears to target her assuredness to about an intermediate level - regardless of what is on the opps profile for level. If she gets a refusal of the claim she will play out the hand completely if there aren't many tricks left or if it is early in the play of the hand she will play it out to a much more obvious position and claim again. She never comments on a refused claim - she plays immediately to the next trick. Another thing she does is if an opp rejects a few claims in succession, she stops claiming and plays them out.

[candybar]

Kudos to Hannie for a very nice, respectful, explanation of the situation and his/her intentions -- it would certainly make me comfortable with the purpose behind the original question, and it shows maturity and class not to be upset with the fact that this thread was posted.

Kudos to rwylee for trying to find out the right way to handle such a situation -- it shows that, intermediate or not, new TD or not, at least s/he is trying to do a good job of being a TD and cares about learning the things s/he doesn't know.

[han]

awm,

I agree with you that it very much depends on the type of game. The title of this tournament was "JUST FOR FUN". Also, the opponents were not upset.


I don't agree with your analogy. Asking partner about a convention is never innocent, it will effect your action and the score. Asking the opponents who has the club king will not affect the score at all, it just speeds up the game. Even though the rules might treat these actions similarly, one of them is much more in the spirit of the game than the other.

[helene_t]

Kudos to Rex, Candy, Han, Elianna and others for this pleasant and instructive thread. I wish more of our TD-decision-threads would be like this one .

Btw, there is an additional difference between online and IRL: IRL, you can't play on after a rejected claim. Therefore, there is a temtation to ask if a claim will be accepted because you don't want the TD to be called (I know this is incorrect, a.o. reasons because declarer can use the information which of the two opps rejected, but it is understandable that it happens.) Online, it can't cost to claim if you're sure it's correct so there can be no reason to ask first. Here, Han didn't know how many tricks he should claim, which explains everything.

[FrancesHinden]

The advantage of playing f2f bridge in a country like England, is that in most tournaments I either know the opponents, and whetherthey will understand a claim on a squeeze, or I don't know them which means they probably won't.

Playing online, you often have no idea who opponents are or how good they are, or whether they even know what a squeeze is.

[Brandal]

Hannie, on Sep 28 2005, 11:05 PM, said:

Asking partner about a convention is never innocent, it will effect your action and the score. Asking the opponents who has the club king will not affect the score at all, it just speeds up the game. Even though the rules might treat these actions similarly, one of them is much more in the spirit of the game than the other.

Online,noone has ever asked me or my partners
who holds a king,noone has ever asked if they can
claim,they just play or claim,and in my opinion that
is the spirit of the game.

I have my doubts if asking me if I have this king or
that king will speed up the game....

I would be reluctant to answer,and definitely dislike
the question

[Gerardo]

Certainly either f2f or online, a claim must follow IMMEDIATELY after the answer to "Which defender hold this card?"

[rigour6]

I have found that it's best not to claim unless and until it's obvious you're all winners (or all winners but one). The reason is time. It takes many opps longer to figure out long claims than it does to play them.

By sticking with my guidelines (only claim when it's obviously all winners or all less one) I still find about 20% of my claims get rejected. That dissuades me from claiming in more complicated cases. That, and the fact that I myself am unaware that I might claim in such cases.

[mycroft]

I think I am agreeing with the tenor of this thread; I would have taken "can I claim on a squeeze?" as "If I claim on the squeeze, is it actually going to save any time, or are you going to be uncomfortable trying to resolve it?", not "is the squeeze going to work?" or whatever. I would take "please play" as anything from "I can't be bothered to work it out" to "I don't understand what you just said" to "no, it isn't going to work" - although I'd expect a "not on" response instead to that one - to "I've got a high trump here that you've obviously forgotten about, this is going to be fun".

After all, there are bridge players out there who can't see a squeeze if they have just played one - the "I just played out my winners and oh my, the heart was good. Why didn't they keep the heart winner?" type.

If I'm playing against Juniors D and S, I will do the "SK with the long diamond?" and claim the appropriate after the answer. If I'm playing anybody I've seen talking to them or their table, I'll do the same thing. If I'm in a tournament, the cards go down until I see if it works or not.

I've asked "where's the DK?" before to shocked surprise that I would deign to ask (and 6 sure tricks later, I find out); I've had kibitzers be shocked by a similar question, in a game where we all knew what I was asking; I've had times when the answer was a quick "offside" and a claim.

Maybe I just assume less nasty of my opponents than I should.

Michael.

[mycroft]

rigour6, on Sep 29 2005, 10:34 AM, said:

By sticking with my guidelines (only claim when it's obviously all winners or all less one) I still find about 20% of my claims get rejected. That dissuades me from claiming in more complicated cases. That, and the fact that I myself am unaware that I might claim in such cases.

My standard unspoken rule on these - online - is "okay, I'll play it out, you claim when you get it."

Side note: I hate "reclaim". There's a nice button on the bottom of their screens as well - they can claim when they know what's going on. I'll do it, but I'm always silently asking "why don't you, then?" Especially when "reclaim"er's partner rejects the reclaim...

Michael.

[rigour6]

Another thing I have done occasionally (more often in ftf) is when I see a newer player sweating over a discard and I was about to claim anyway I say to them, "Don't worry about what to keep, at this point it doesn't matter."

This is the kind of sentence I want to be awfully sure about before I say, however.

[G_R__E_G]

I've found that f2f even though I wait until it's painfully obvious the ops still often have trouble. I've just taken to facing my hand and continuing to play until they surrender. I wish they would add that option on BBO, for declarer to face their hand without claiming.

[inquiry]

G_R__E_G, on Sep 30 2005, 12:08 PM, said:

I've found that f2f even though I wait until it's painfully obvious the ops still often have trouble.  I've just taken to facing my hand and continuing to play until they surrender.  I wish they would add that option on BBO, for declarer to face their hand without claiming.

Isn't this what we do on BBO. You claim, they can see your cards, they either accept or not... if not, you play on... At some point, they will etiher give, or not.

BTW I was playing last night and dummy was good except for the a losing ♣. PArtner had denied intrest in clubs at a time where he would not have done so with the ACE.... So I told declarer to go ahead and claim with the ♣ACE... .Eight tricks later, with just an ace remaining (last trick) he claimed.

I should have claimed ZERO.... Sigh.

[han]

Perhaps I should have conceeded after you made that comment. Watching those last 8 tricks go by was painful.


[edit by Hannie]

[G_R__E_G]

Quote

Isn't this what we do on BBO. You claim, they can see your cards, they either accept or not... if not, you play on... At some point, they will etiher give, or not.

I know it's virtually the same thing, but sometimes it's more "comfortable" to just show your cards. For example, you don't know your opponents skill level but you know what the outcome of the hand will be. Rather than force them to decide whether to accept your claim or not, you show your hand and at least if they don't surrender it helps them decide on their discards quicker.

[G_R__E_G]

Quote

sometimes I claim and then reject (myself) so that they can see my hand and claim the appropriate amount.

That works too. However, correct me if I am wrong, but I believe the ops don't know who rejected the claim. So if they are pick-up partners it might give them the wrong impression of their partner's abilities.

[jillybean]

All very confusing and maybe quicker to play the hand out

[han]

Jlall, on Sep 30 2005, 02:51 PM, said:

sometimes I claim and then reject (myself) so that they can see my hand and claim the appropriate amount.

Ah, I've seen you do that and thought that you were just miscounting. I should have known better I guess.

[candybar]

G_R__E_G, on Sep 30 2005, 11:08 AM, said:

I've found that f2f even though I wait until it's painfully obvious the ops still often have trouble. I've just taken to facing my hand and continuing to play until they surrender. I wish they would add that option on BBO, for declarer to face their hand without claiming.

Deliberately facing your hand constitutes a claim.