[donnaruthe]

When partner concedes remaining tricks to opponents and you disagree, what options exist for objecting?

[P_Marlowe]

donnaruthe, on 2013-November-11, 05:11, said:

When partner concedes remaining tricks to opponents and you disagree, what options exist for objecting?

You can reject it.

The tried concession is UI for you, and so is your rejection of the claim.
This mean, the partnership has to be careful not to use this UI, e.g. using the concession / rejection of
the concession as a "wake up call", that there is ruffing possibility.

For the prober ruling go to the law forum section.

The first thing to do is, prevent partner from showing his cards, and after that call the TD.
If your partner did not show his cards, play can continue, if he showed his cards, I dont know for
sure, in the end, it could well be, that play continues, but his cards become penalty cards, and the
penalty cards rule apply.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Zelandakh]

Hello and welcome to the BBO forums. The relevant law is 68B2:

if a defender attempts to concede one or more tricks and his partner immediately objects, no concession has occurred. Unauthorized information may exist, so the Director should be summoned immediately. Play continues. Any card that has been exposed by a defender in these circumstances is not a penalty card but Law 16D applies to information arising from its exposure and the information may not be used by the partner of the defender who has exposed it.


Uwe has already summarised this except for the case where a defender has shown their cards. You can see from the law above that play continues in this case too but that increases the amount of UI available. The exposed cards are not penalty cards - that is unusual for defenders' cards deliberately exposed and is easy to get wrong.

The thing to take away from this is not what this specific law says but rather that you should object and ask the table to stop procedings until the TD arrives. The TD will then explain what can happen without mistakes being made. This is what the TD is there for and you should not feel bad about calling her/him when you are unsure. You should not just take the word of an opponent of the proper procedure here; player rulings are often wrong and only end up complicating matters for the TD when they eventually do get involved.

[billw55]

Also, if OP is asking about BBO play, then as far as I can tell BBO offers no method for one defender rejecting a concession by the other.

[ggwhiz]

On BBO I have messaged the Director several times both for and against saying mistaken claim or concession on board # whatever and have gotten the result corrected every time. For general speed of play it's just not practical to wait for both defenders to accept a claim especially in tournaments.

Without a Director you are pretty much out of luck but there was a famous case in a close Bermuda Final when Billy Eisenberg declared 3nt and accidentally dropped a card face up. Garozzo and Belladonna told him to carry on but he insisted on a Director call and ended up down 4.

Next hand the Italians played a cold 3nt comically for down 4.

[Vampyr]

ggwhiz, on 2013-November-11, 10:39, said:

Without a Director you are pretty much out of luck but there was a famous case in a close Bermuda Final when Billy Eisenberg declared 3nt and accidentally dropped a card face up. Garozzo and Belladonna told him to carry on but he insisted on a Director call and ended up down 4.

I don't understand this. A dropped card is not a played card.

[ggwhiz]

Vampyr, on 2013-November-11, 12:28, said:

I don't understand this. A dropped card is not a played card.

Face up on the table is or at least it was when the match was played. Mid to late 60's maybe?