[blml] concession

[gesta at tiscali.co.uk]

Grattan Endicott<gesta at tiscali.co.uk
[following address discontinued:
grandeval at vejez.fsnet.co.uk]
***********************
"In nature there are neither 
rewards nor punishments - 
there are consequences.
              [R.G.Ingersoll]
 +++++++++++++++++++++++
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Tim West-Meads" <twm at cix.co.uk>
To: <blml at rtflb.org>
Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2008 11:43 AM
Subject: Re: [blml] concession


> *From:* "Sven Pran" <svenpran at online.no>
> *To:* "'Bridge Laws Mailing List'" <blml at amsterdamned.org>
> *Date:* Wed, 2 Jan 2008 18:09:34 +0100
> 

> 
"It was agreed that when a *concession is made by a defender of a 
number of tricks, THEREBY claiming the complement* of the remaining
tricks, .."

"I get two tricks and you get the last three" is not a case of a
concession THEREBY claiming.  It is explicitly both a claim AND a
concession.

"OK, I get my two hearts" is an explicit claim and, if more than two
tricks remain, it is a "claim THEREBY conceding the remainder.

+=+ In my opinion that statement and the statement that
"a claim of some number of tricks is a concession of the 
remainder" are reciprocal and "you can't have one without 
the other". What is clear is that play continues and the only 
question is whether the claimer is or is not free to play as 
he wishes. That is a matter for interpretation. Personally 
I would say that if we had meant the player to be constrained 
to play in a particular way Law 68B2 would have said so.
                                  ~ Grattan ~   +=+