[blml] claim

[Tim West-Meads]

Sven wrote:
> > 
> > There's no provision in law for a claim to be cancelled by an 
> > objection and the WBF minute is truly bizarre.
> > 
> > Tim
> 
> Haven't you read (and understood) 2007 Law 68B2?

The version I am reading (marked up) says "2. Regardless of 1 preceding,
if a defender attempts to concede one or more tricks and his partner
immediately objects, no concession *or claim* has occurred.

Please note the *or claim* is strikethrough not bold.  To me that clearly
says that the WBF considered that an objection to a concession should
cancel a partial claim and decided that it should not.  The TD would rule
on the claim taking into account the objection to the concession.

Thus the second part of that law (about play continuing) applies only to
cases where there was a concession but no claim.  (Ie the same as a
normal reading of the '97 laws).

Do you understand things differently?

Tim