Case 10
With three tricks to play, the Declarer throws his cards face upward on the table, claiming the remaining tricks. His opponents admit his claim, and the score is entered. The Dummy then calls the attention of the table to the fact that, had a certain lead been made, the Declarer could not have taken all the tricks.
Query: Under the circumstances, is the Declarer entitled to all the tricks; first, viewing the question solely from a strict interpretation of the laws; and second, from the standpoint of good sportsmanship?
Decision
Section 10 of Etiquette provides, "If a player concede in error one or more tricks, the concession should stand." There is no law affecting this situation, and, therefore, the section of Etiquette above quoted clearly covers the first portion of the query.
As to whether good sportsmanship would require the Declarer, under such circumstances, to voluntarily surrender any of the tricks to which he is entitled by law, does not seem to produce a more serious question.
It is true that the adversaries, by overlooking a possible play, made a concession that was not required, and that the Dummy noticed the error of the adversaries. Why, however, should the Dummy be obliged to correct this error any more than any other mistake of his opponents?
It is perfectly clear that, had a similar error been made by the Declarer, the Dummy could not have saved himself from suffering by reason of it, and, whether the question be either a strict interpretation of law or of sportsmanship, it is a poor rule that does not work both ways.
Both parts of the query are, therefore, answered in the affirmative.
Case 11