[blml] claim

[Alain Gottcheiner]

Tim West-Meads a écrit :
> 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.
>
>   
AG : IMNSHO, keeping the claim was necessary, else the restricting 
effects of the claim (ie the claimer may only play as one said one would 
do). Now it also means