[blml] Réf. : played or not?

[Grattan Endicott]

Grattan Endicott
grandeval at vejez.fsnet .co.uk
[also gesta at tiscali.co.uk]
****************************
"A man forever undone by
 the second p in problem,"
                        [Epitaph]
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Alain Gottcheiner
To: blml ; Herman De Wael
Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2007 3:33 PM
Subject: [blml] Réf. : played or not?




-------Message original-------

De : Herman De Wael
Date : 07/08/2007 12:51:01
A : blml
Sujet : [blml] played or not?

The contract is 3NT but declarer is confused and
he thinks  he's playing 5 diamonds. He plays a card
from hand and instructs dummy to "ruff". When the
table stops laughing, the director is called.
Has the lowest diamond been played or not?


We had a similar case two years ago (in 2NT vs spades).
Since there is no trump suit, there is no card designated
by the words "trump" or "ruff".Come to think of it, if
declarer doesn't say himself what suit he believes to be
trumps, how would you rule which suit he has in mind ?
That's the way André Leplat ruled, and he was right IMHO.

Best regards

Alain
-----------------------------------------------------------
Grattan (repeated):
+=+ As to what argument could persuade me in an appeal
committee, I would listen with care to any suggestion that
declarer has not played any card because he has not given
any instruction as to a play consistent with a No Trumps
contract.   ~ G ~   +=+






_______________________________________________
blml mailing list
blml at amsterdamned.org
http://www.amsterdamned.org/mailman/listinfo/blml