[blml] re claim. CORRECTION.

[David Burn]

[GE]

       I believe that it was neither the intention nor the effect of the 
 2007 Laws that  this simple procedure should not continue in 
place. I continue to maintain that when some tricks are claimed 
and others conceded this is one indivisible act; an objection to 
either the claim or the concession is an objection to both. Play 
continues as Law 68B2 requires (and may perhaps be viewed 
as evidence under Law 70D3).

[DALB]

It might be an idea to put the words "or claim" after the word "concession"
in L68B2. Then, everyone will know what is meant.

Curiously enough, the first contribution I can remember making to BLML was
on the topic of whether a concession of some tricks was the "same thing as"
or merely "part of" an implied claim of the remaining tricks. DWS kept
saying that in those circumstances "a claim is a concession" meant that they
were one and the same thing, but that was of course nonsense.

David Burn
London, England