[blml] Fw: played or not? [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

[Matthias Berghaus]

Herman De Wael schrieb:
>
> Really, I don't believe that this argument should turn us awy from the 
> fact that the layer that says "ruff" has uniquely designated the card 
> he intended to play, and that this card should be considered played.
>
>   

I do not think that many of us have a problem with making declarer play 
a card he has designated when we know what that was. I, for one, have a 
problem with making declarer play a card he did not intend to play 
because a) he lies or b) refuses to say what he wanted to play. What are 
you going to do when declarer says "ruff", and answers your question 
about the perceived contract with "3NT". Hang him? I agree that most 
declarers will tell the truth when asked, but some will lie. Now what?
The problem with those few cases will be that the opps will feel cheated 
quite often. If we rule no card designated in all cases we treat them 
all alike. Not the best possible result, but rather the best result 
possible, I think.
I would love to make declarer play the card he intended, but there is 
danger that way. Ask me no wpestions, and I will tell you no lies....

Regards
Matthias