[blml] A question of player ability

[Karel]

I've been reading (re)reading several bridge books, bididng, law
cases, etc.  I know that in many cases when judging a case the level
of the player is taken into a/c and a different ruling or a warning
may be awarded in similar cases.

I just wonder is there any provision for questioning a players
bidding, play or defense which appears to be "wild", "unusual",
"visionary" - given that players level ?

(eg)  A really good player makes the only lead (say underleads an ace
when they have QJTx or some other fairly standout lead) which beats
the contract, for no good reason.  Or a really good declarer takes a
very low percentage line risking going down in a stone cold contract
making plus one, again for no good reason.  Or a 3rd example would be
a player of any level making a bid which works out unbelievably well
but which again there is no good reason for.

Do the laws allow you to question such a players action or is it
simply put down to a "maddness" which worked ?  Where is the line
drawn in such cases ?

Karel