Help
Declarer's RHO makes a lead face down and then just as she faces the heart queen, the declarer says "I'm declarer". It turns out the dummy misinformed the player that it was her lead.
From ACBL's Duplicate Decision for Law 54 (Faced Opening Lead Out Of Turn): "A player may withdraw a lead out of turn if the leader was mistakenly informed by an opponent that it was his turn to lead (Law 47E). Remember, too, that an opening lead by the declaring side may not be accepted, Law 24."
From Law 47E (Change of Play Based on Misinformation):
1. A lead out of turn (or play of a card) may be retracted without further rectification if the player was mistakenly informed by an opponent that it
was his turn to lead or play. A lead or play may not be accepted by his LHO in this circumstance.
2. (a) A player may retract the card he has played because of a mistaken explanation of an opponent’s call or play and before a corrected explanation without further rectification, but only if no card was subsequently played to that trick. An opening lead may not be retracted after dummy has faced any card.
Therefore, if the heart queen opening lead is retracted, it does not become a penalty card and it's location is authorized information to the defender's partner. (Presumably, it would be unauthorized for declarer's side.)
I am having trouble finding the proper law references for which defender, presumably without consultation, gets to decide on letting the heart queen lead stand or not. Of if there is no choice at all for the defenders and the proper opening leader must lead following retraction of the incorrect heart queen opening lead.
It seems to me the correct opening leader must lead with the incorrect card retracted and that card being AI for the opening leader. Is this correct?
Page 1 of 1
Opening lead out of turn - misinformed whose lead it is
#1
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 475
- Joined: 2004-April-18
- Gender:Male
- Location:South Bend, Indiana, USA
- Interests:Operations Supervisor/Technical Advisor at nuclear power plant, soccer and basketball referee for more than 25 years; GLM; Ex-Head (Game) Director at South Bend (Indiana) Bridge Club; avid student of bridge law and game movements
Posted 2015-September-21, 12:26
#2
- Group: Admin
- Posts: 21,412
- Joined: 2004-August-21
- Gender:Male
Posted 2015-September-21, 14:28
I think the use of "may" rather than "must" in 47E means that it's optional. And since the leader's LHO (declarer, in this case) is not allowed to accept it, that leaves the defender as the one who can avail himself of the option.
#3
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 17,590
- Joined: 2006-April-17
- Gender:Male
- Location:Rochester, NY
Posted 2015-September-21, 15:47
Ah, but if he decides to let it stand, what happens next?
--------------------
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
Page 1 of 1