[jdaming]

Okay so last night at the club this situation happened:

Partner is playing a contract say...♦ is already going down but all of this is I think inconsequential.

She has all trump in her hand but 1 bad ♣. Dummy has 2♦ left and no ♣. LHO has one low trump.

My partner drops 2 top trumps and the club and says pulling trump and ruffing a club.

Director gets to table and rules that since she dropped 2 trumps she was going to pull 2 rounds of trump and would have in this case left no trump in dummy so she could not ruff.

I thought this was unfair as is not logical even if there were 2 trumps out which there were not.

What is the proper ruling?

[cranebill]

If it was stated pulling one round of trumps, then ruffing club, I would say a fair claim, but you stated they said "pulling trump" and laying two trumps on the table, I think the director is correct, albeit pedantic, but that is what bridge is all about, it is in the detail

[Echognome]

I would think it clear that the claim statement "pulling trump and ruffing a club" only makes sense if there is a trump left to ruff with. So I would rule the rest of the tricks and that declarer was aware of the outstanding trump.

[jtfanclub]

Not enough information. I'd have to be there.

But yes, it's certainly a possiblity that I'd rule in favor of down 1 more.

[jdaming]

What more info do you need?

[Stephen Tu]

Maybe how many total cards were left?

IMO if these were the last 3 cards it's clear the ruling was bad, when you claim you are supposed to face all your cards & state line of play, and supposedly it was "pulling trump" singular & ruff club. Both LHO & director are being ridiculous if this is the case.

But if there were say 6 cards left then facing exactly two trumps & a club but concealing the others is really weird, it's less clearcut. Train your partner not to do that, face all the cards.

[rogerclee]

Echognome, on Jun 17 2008, 11:00 AM, said:

I would think it clear that the claim statement "pulling trump and ruffing a club" only makes sense if there is a trump left to ruff with.  So I would rule the rest of the tricks and that declarer was aware of the outstanding trump.

Agree with gnome, this is not a problem.

Talk about lawyering.

[TimG]

"Pulling trump" sounds plural to me, especially in combination with facing exactly two trump from your own hand. I think I'd reluctantly award the defenders one more trick.

[jdaming]

there were 6 cards left declarer held 5 trump and 1 bad club

If "pulling trump" is plural what is singular?

Seemed to me that no reasonable play could involve playing two rounds of trump only to realize none were left in dummy.

Even if the defender had 2 trumps the only logical way to play it would be to either play one round then ruff or ruff and then come back to hand with a trump. LHO was not out of ♣.

[FrancesHinden]

TimG, on Jun 17 2008, 09:04 PM, said:

"Pulling trump" sounds plural to me, especially in combination with facing exactly two trump from your own hand. I think I'd reluctantly award the defenders one more trick.

Depends a bit what country you are in.
In the UK, people tend to say "drawing trumps" in general, and then "drawing the trump" if there is only one left. "pulling trump" would only be said by a visitor from across the Atlantic, but in particular "trump" is singular and "trumps" are plural. The US form seems to be that "trump" is a plural noun.

[cranebill]

I was under the impression, that if you lay the cards on the table whilst claiming, that is the order the cards must be played?

IF, that is the case, the TD was correct ?

[bid_em_up]

cranebill, on Jun 17 2008, 03:27 PM, said:

I was under the impression, that if you lay the cards on the table whilst claiming, that is the order the cards must be played?

IF, that is the case, the TD was correct ?

This is not correct. You face your hand (or lay it on the table) and state a line of play.

The line of play dictates the order, not the order of the cards in your hand as faced.

My trumps may be in my hand as 24KA, and not AK42, if you say drawing trumps, obviously you are not leading the two first.

[bid_em_up]

jdaming, on Jun 17 2008, 03:17 PM, said:

there were 6 cards left declarer held 5 trump and 1 bad club

If "pulling trump" is plural what is singular?

Seemed to me that no reasonable play could involve playing two rounds of trump only to realize none were left in dummy.

Even if the defender had 2 trumps the only logical way to play it would be to either play one round then ruff or ruff and then come back to hand with a trump. LHO was not out of ♣.

How many cards were left remaining at the time?

[TimG]

FrancesHinden, on Jun 17 2008, 03:19 PM, said:

TimG, on Jun 17 2008, 09:04 PM, said:

"Pulling trump" sounds plural to me, especially in combination with facing exactly two trump from your own hand.  I think I'd reluctantly award the defenders one more trick.

Depends a bit what country you are in.
In the UK, people tend to say "drawing trumps" in general, and then "drawing the trump" if there is only one left. "pulling trump" would only be said by a visitor from across the Atlantic, but in particular "trump" is singular and "trumps" are plural. The US form seems to be that "trump" is a plural noun.

I think you will hear both "drawing trump" and "drawing trumps" on this side of the Atlantic, but that "drawing trump" is more common. And, as you suggest, with just a single trump outstanding, one would tend to say "drawing the trump" or even "pulling the last trump".

But, regardless of which side of the Atlantic you are on, wouldn't you expect "pulling trump" in combination with the facing of two trumps to mean "drawing two rounds"?

[blackshoe]

If you say you're going to ruff a club, it would not be normal to denude your dummy of trumps before leading the club.

As others have said, you'd have to have been there, but I think it unlikely I would award a trick to the defense.

[Echognome]

TimG, on Jun 17 2008, 01:19 PM, said:

But, regardless of which side of the Atlantic you are on, wouldn't you expect "pulling trump" in combination with the facing of two trumps to mean "drawing two rounds"?

I'd also expect that if declarer said he was going to ruff a club in dummy, he wouldn't draw all of dummy's trumps first!

Note that the facing of the hand is used in determining whether there has been a claim, not in determining the order of the tricks. The claim statement is what dictates the order of the tricks.

[jtfanclub]

jdaming, on Jun 17 2008, 02:31 PM, said:

What more info do you need?

When I'm claiming, I frequently show my hand one card at a time, in the order I'm playing them in, such as "play a trump, draw the last trump, ruff a club, run the diamonds from the top". If that's what the person was doing, then I guess I'd have to rule against him.

But my tendency would be to rule the claim was good.

[Codo]

It is so obvious that if I state a line which includes the words " ruff club" that it would be plain silly to draw all trumps from dummy first.

Besides this, "drawing trump" sounds singular to me, so there was NO reason for the TD to rule different.

[blackshoe]

When a player lays down his hand one card at a time while stating his line of play, clearly he is showing how the line of play will go, in his hand. When a player does something else, such as laying down his hand and stating a line of play, the order in which he lays down his cards is irrelevant.

[jtfanclub]

blackshoe, on Jun 18 2008, 08:45 AM, said:

When a player lays down his hand one card at a time while stating his line of play, clearly he is showing how the line of play will go, in his hand. When a player does something else, such as laying down his hand and stating a line of play, the order in which he lays down his cards is irrelevant.

It's just not clear to me. He 'dropped two trumps and a club' out of his hand could mean he tossed three cards down simultaneously, or dropped a trump, then a trump, then a club.

Certainly if he put down his entire hand at the same time, it wouldn't matter what order it was in. He didn't do that, but what he did do I'm not sure.