[blml] concession

[ton]

Eric:


TFLB says explicitly that "a claim of some number of tricks is a concession
of the remainder".  Sven's argument is based on "assuming the converse" (a
well-known logical fallacy), which would be that "a concession of some
number of tricks is a claim of the remainder".  I don't find that anywhere
in TFLB.

ton:
With the arithmatical education I had almost 60 years ago I am able to solve
the problem of 
37 + 215 = ? even when I have never seen this problem before. 
I am trying to convince Eric that it is not always necessary to explicitely
state procedures, agreements, whatever and still being able to understand
what has to be done. 


Yes, when a claim of some is a concession of the other then a concession of
some is a claim of the other. 
Don't try to convince me that there is (should be) a difference in treatment
between a defender with four tricks to go saying 'you get one' instead of 'I
take three'. 

And if this was the case before '75 forget it. Some developments are
improvements. 

ton