[blml] claim

[Sven Pran]

> On Behalf Of Eric Landau
.............
> It does, because we've been told that it does.  But you wouldn't know
> it just from reading the text.

Sure I do. Reading the text is precisely how I know.

> Note that the law does not refer to a "concession", but rather to an
> "attempt[] to concede".  One could easily argue that a concession
> spawned by an attempt to claim, per L68B1, is different from an
> attempt to concede.

Please explain how the difference can be relevant.

To me a statement like "one trick to each of us" made by a defender to
declarer is an attempt, in this case both to claim one trick and to concede
the other. If he (with more than one trick left to play) says just "one
trick to me" that is also an attempt to claim one trick and to concede the
rest.

The attempt becomes a claim respectively a concession unless his partner
immediately objects.

When declarer concedes it is no "attempt" simply because he has no partner
that may object to the concession.

Sven