[blml] normal lines

[Jerry Fusselman]

> Richard Hills:
>
> Anyway, with an unmentioned line of play one has to draw
> the line somewhere.
>
>         K2
> QJ               T9
>         A3
>
> If a player is capable of not crashing the ace and king
> together, is he not also capable of mentioning it?
>
> ;-)

No one expects mentioning how to play your example.  The laws require
mentioning trump.  The laws could be clearer, but it is reasonable to
assume that since trumps should mentioned in the statement, maybe
squeezes and finesses should be too.

>
> Since few claims succeed on all legal plays of all the
> remaining cards, the word "normal" and the phrase "class
> of player" are necessary evils.
>

Non sequitur.  The premise "few claims succeed on all legal plays" is
inadequate to conclude that the phrase "class of player" is a
necessary evil.  It seems to me adequate to conclude that something
like "normal" needs to be there, but not class of player.  If Mrs.
Guggenheim makes the same plays and uses the same claim statement as
Geir Helgemo, your premise provides zero evidence that they should
receive different scores.

Jerry Fusselman