the purpose of watching his partner's play; but even should he do so,
his breach of etiquette would not deprive him of the rights given him
by law.
An adversary may unquestionably object to the Dummy watching the play
of the Declarer.
That, however, is not the case under consideration. The penalty for the
revoke is the most severe in Auction, many think it unreasonably so,
and a player is unquestionably entitled to every protection the law
affords him.
The decision, therefore, is that, under the conditions named, the
question may be asked.
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