[blml] Countdown

[Tim West-Meads]

Eric wrote:

> > Perhaps I should ask a different question - does "normal" include 
> > the bizarre/inconceivable for the class of player involved?
> 
> It would seem to, per the new wording of the footnote.  A play 
> can't  be "bizarre/inconceivable" -- or, for that matter, 
> "irrational" --  while simultaneously being neither careless nor 
> inferior.  

Of course it can.  A trump squeeze might be technically superior (say 60%
chance of success against 50%) but happens to fail.  It might also be
"inconceivable" (ie beyond the wildest improbable dreams of ever being
understood/recognised/attempted) by my dear Mrs Guggenheim - who thought
it obvious that she was simply taking the heart finesse again ("it worked
the first time dear").

Hamman wouldn't have claimed in the same position of course - he would
have played the trump squeeze out and gone off.

Tim