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
Auction of to-Day · The Wunder Library — complete classics, free to read, with narration.