[CSGibson]

One of my former partners has the habit, as declarer, of throwing her hand down and failing to state a line of play, simply stating "the rest are mine", and in the same motion gathering the hand back up without giving enough time to opponents to look at the hand. Most of the time she is correct in her claim, but occasionally not.

1). What steps can the directors take to make sure that this individual starts making claims in the proper manner?

2). What are the potential consequences if this person keeps on claiming as described (which occurs anywhere from 1-3 times in a 24 board session).

[blackshoe]

I would as director suggest to her that this is not proper procedure, and thus subject to procedural penalty if she continues to do it. I would suggest to her opponents (and her partner for that matter) that they point this out when she does it, and then (as the law would require) call the director. As the director, after a warning, I would issue a PP when called for this.

Continually and willfully failing to follow the instructions of the TD is IMO grounds for suspension or expulsion from the club.

[bluejak]

Having seen people who do this I am inclined to think we might start using DPs not PPs. What this does is wind opponents up: it is a clear breach of Law in that it annoys opponents.

[CSGibson]

bluejak, on Mar 24 2010, 07:18 PM, said:

Having seen people who do this I am inclined to think we might start using DPs not PPs. What this does is wind opponents up: it is a clear breach of Law in that it annoys opponents.

DP?

[blackshoe]

Disciplinary penalty. Law 90 is about procedural penalties (PP) "for any offense that unduly delays or obstructs the game, inconveniences other contestants, violates correct procedure or requires the award of an adjusted score at another table". Law 91 is about disciplinary penalties (DP): "In performing his duty to maintain order and discipline, the director is empowered to assess disciplinary penalties in points or to suspend a contestant for the current session or any part thereof" and "The director is empowered to disqualify a contestant for cause, subject to approval by the tournament organizer".

[duschek]

1) I think the opponents should be the ones taking measures. Simply ask to see the cards and take the time necessary to ascertain that declarer could never go wrong (or if she could, ask the TD to assess the hand). Basically, declarer got her habit because everybody lets her get away with it.

Obviously, you could discuss the matter with a TD that she respects. If she respects no TD, nothing will help. DPs may cure the actual problem, but she might find other ways to annoy opponents (depending on her personality of course).

2) The potential consequences of 1) are that the number of occurrences probably decreases

[helene_t]

People do this all the time. Sometimes the claim is really obvious (like all cards being winners in both hands) but some people do it also without stating in which order they need to cash the winners to preserve entries, or that they need to draw trumps first.

Agree with duschek.

[pooltuna]

bluejak, on Mar 24 2010, 09:18 PM, said:

Having seen people who do this I am inclined to think we might start using DPs not PPs. What this does is wind opponents up: it is a clear breach of Law in that it annoys opponents.

Failing to make a claim is also a violation IIRC are you going to start issuing DPs for that as well? This is a procedural problem that needs to be corrected by the TD. As the partner you need to get the violator to state she retains the right to play the cards in any order but that they are showing their cards to speed up play and make her proceed to play out the hand until the opponents concede.

[blackshoe]

pooltuna, on Mar 25 2010, 08:29 AM, said:

bluejak, on Mar 24 2010, 09:18 PM, said:

Having seen people who do this I am inclined to think we might start using DPs not PPs.  What this does is wind opponents up: it is a clear breach of Law in that it annoys opponents.

Failing to make a claim is also a violation IIRC are you going to start issuing DPs for that as well? This is a procedural problem that needs to be corrected by the TD.

I mentioned upthread willful disregard of the TD's instructions. David mentioned annoying the opponents (Law 74A2). If she is deliberately trying to annoy them, that rates a DP. If she is willfully disregarding the TD's instructions, that rates a DP. If it's just that, as someone suggested, she's been allowed by opponents to get away with not stating a line of play for years, then I would start with a DP.

Failing to make a claim is a violation? Of which law?

Quote

As the partner you need to get the violator to state she retains the right to play the cards in any order but that they are showing their cards to speed up play and make her proceed to play out the hand until the opponents concede.

Claimer has no such right. And once a claim is made, it's illegal to play out the hand.

[iviehoff]

There is no law that says that players must show their cards to the opposition when claiming, and there are a small number of players, even at the highest level, who routinely do not do so. The late lamented British international player John Collings was noted for this manner of claiming. Whilst to my mind this is unusual behaviour and to be deprecated, it seems to me wrong to apply penalties to a player merely on the grounds that a player has not shown their cards when claiming, or shown them in a way that did not make them easy to see, given that they had no legal obligation to show them.

The appropriate remedy is for the opponents to be proper about it. They should politely request to see the cards properly, and if they don't get that call the director. Hopefully the player would learn that this is a time-consuming and unpleasant way of managing a claim, though apparently John Collings learned a different lesson. And if the director started to be called more than once about it he might find grounds under Law 74 (courtesy annoyance, etc) for words with the player. And of course if there was ever any reasonable suspicion that a player was proceeding in this manner to conceal a faulty claim, they should expect to have the book thrown at them (figuratively speaking).

[blackshoe]

The law does require a clear and complete line of play statement. Failure to do that can certainly be penalized.

[G_R__E_G]

blackshoe, on Mar 25 2010, 10:14 AM, said:

Failing to make a claim is a violation? Of which law?

The law that people are refering to when they say this is 74B4. The thing is though that it's only illegal if you're not claiming just to piss off your opponents. If you're not claiming for any other reason you're okay.

[blackshoe]

G_R__E_G, on Mar 25 2010, 11:04 AM, said:

If you're not claiming for any other reason you're okay.

Yeah. I expect a breach of 74B4 by not claiming is about as rare as hen's teeth.

[iviehoff]

blackshoe, on Mar 25 2010, 04:35 PM, said:

The law does require a clear and complete line of play statement. Failure to do that can certainly be penalized.

I've never heard of anyone being penalised for failing to give a clear and complete play statement. They sometimes get a rather legalistic adjudication of their claim when they have failed to provide one, but a separate penalty? Perhaps you can cite an incident.

This is one of those laws that is customarily disregarded and most of the time there isn't a problem. Many people don't expect to have to point out what they hold to be reasonably obvious when making a claim, and often they are playing with people who agree with them. The problems arise when the opposition disagree over what can reasonably be held to be obvious, or think that you might have overlooked something. And sometimes the claim is faulty. That's when the problems arise. But penalise someone for failing to provide a complete statement of claim?

[blackshoe]

iviehoff, on Mar 25 2010, 12:25 PM, said:

I've never heard of anyone being penalised for failing to give a clear and complete play statement.

How is that relevant?

Quote

They sometimes get a rather legalistic adjudication of their claim when they have failed to provide one, but a separate penalty? Perhaps you can cite an incident.

No, I can't. So? I didn't say such people ever got a PP for this, or even that they should get a penalty, I only said that it is legal to give them one.

Quote

This is one of those laws that is customarily disregarded and most of the time there isn't a problem.  Many people don't expect to have to point out what they hold to be reasonably obvious when making a claim, and often they are playing with people who agree with them. The problems arise when the opposition disagree over what can reasonably be held to be obvious, or think that you might have overlooked something. And sometimes the claim is faulty.  That's when the problems arise.  But penalise someone for failing to provide a complete statement of claim?

Yeah, sure, let's "customarily disregard the law". After all, laws don't apply to us unless we want them to, right?

Ordinarily, I would not give a PP for failing to follow Law 68C. After all, the laws tell me that ordinarily I should not. But when a player repeatedly does this, and repeatedly it causes problems, and I (as TD) have repeatedly told him to comply with the law, the situation is no longer ordinary. And one thing I will never do is tell a player that if he does (or fails to do) such-and-such, he will be penalized, and then not penalize him when the time comes.

[barmar]

blackshoe, on Mar 25 2010, 12:45 PM, said:

iviehoff, on Mar 25 2010, 12:25 PM, said:

I've never heard of anyone being penalised for failing to give a clear and complete play statement.

How is that relevant?

Quote

They sometimes get a rather legalistic adjudication of their claim when they have failed to provide one, but a separate penalty? Perhaps you can cite an incident.

No, I can't. So? I didn't say such people ever got a PP for this, or even that they should get a penalty, I only said that it is legal to give them one.

Your emphasis with the word "certainly" may have suggested that you think such a penalty would be reasonable.

The OP said that the offending player makes these incomplete claims frequently, but we're not told how often they cause problems. My impression is that 90% of all claims are made with not much more explanation than "the rest are mine" or "giving up the high trump", because most people wait until they're down to all winners before claiming. But they usually show their hand and allow enough time for the opponents to see that it's all winners (as we've discussed before, the Laws don't require exposing the hand when claiming, but it's the common procedure). My regular f2f partner is one of the few people I know who makes detailed claim statements even when it's obvious.

So I wouldn't penalize the player for frequent incomplete claims unless these also cause frequent problems. It seems incredibly unfair to give someone a penalty for behaving like almost all other players.

[iviehoff]

blackshoe, on Mar 25 2010, 06:45 PM, said:

iviehoff, on Mar 25 2010, 12:25 PM, said:

I've never heard of anyone being penalised for failing to give a clear and complete play statement.

How is that relevant?

Merely to demonstrate the irrelevance of what you said.