[blackshoe]

euclidz, on 2015-December-27, 08:37, said:

My problem is that Law 57 unambiguously speaks about offender playing a card before his partners has played a card i.e. not after partner has played his cards and before RHO has played his card!

Hm. Did I screw up? What part of "before East plays to the current trick" is unclear? What did I miss?

[blackshoe]

I would ask him "what were you doing?" I don't want to lead him down any particular path.

Law 56, "Defender's Lead Out of Turn" says "See Law 54D" (and nothing else). 54D says "Declarer may require a defender to retract his faced opening lead out of turn. The withdrawn card becomes a major penalty card and Law 50D applies." Here we can ignore the word "opening" in 54D, as Barry suggests.

[wank]

by the way, acol is one among many systems for bidding. it has precisely nothing to do with the laws of the game.

[barmar]

wank, on 2015-December-28, 19:34, said:

by the way, acol is one among many systems for bidding. it has precisely nothing to do with the laws of the game.

I made the same point in his other thread: http://www.bridgebas...post__p__872098

[1eyedjack]

I wouldn't want to discourage players, who may be unsure of the relevance of local regulations, from stating their jurisdiction. We can always ignore the info. Or even pointing out that it is independent of jurisdiction may be of value to the OP.

[mink]

blackshoe, on 2015-December-26, 23:15, said:

Example 1: South is declarer. He leads a club. East plays ♣A out of turn. ♣A becomes a major penalty card, and declarer may 1) require West to play his highest club, 2) require West to play his lowest club, 3) forbid West from playing one of a spade, a heart or a diamond. If West can't comply, he can play any card. Note that there is nothing in this law about East picking up the ♣A and putting it back in his hand — that card is played, willy-nilly.

Example 2: South, declarer, leads a diamond. West plays ♦A. Whether South plays from dummy or not, West then leads a club before East plays to the current trick. Same rectification as above. Law 57 doesn't say so, but I expect East (and North) should play to the trick in progress before rectification for the LOOT.

I fully agree with Example 1. Example 2 sounds like you think that declarer's option apply to the following trick, to which no card has been played yet, except that West tried to lead out of turn. I believe, however, that the card that East still has to play to the first trick, where a diamond was led, is subject to possible restrictions by South. The text of Law 57A does not state explicitly which trick is meant. However, I never had any doubt the it must be the current trick, where offender's partner has an UI by the premature lead, and declarer is put into the position to prevent the use of this UI by requiring or forbidding plays by offender's partner.

In this example South is declarer in an nt contact and leads from the hand, West follows suit and the dummy plays ♣2. Before East follows suit West already leads ♠2 to the next trick, under the impression that East must have the ♠A. If there were no options for the declarer, East could win the trick with ♦A in order to at least get the trick with the ♥A. But thanks Law 57A South can require East to play his lowest ♦ card and so avoid an UI ruling (you never know if TD would get that right).

---

Karl

[pran]

mink, on 2015-December-29, 13:27, said:

I fully agree with Example 1. Example 2 sounds like you think that declarer's option apply to the following trick, to which no card has been played yet, except that West tried to lead out of turn. I believe, however, that the card that East still has to play to the first trick, where a diamond was led, is subject to possible restrictions by South. The text of Law 57A does not state explicitly which trick is meant. However, I never had any doubt the it must be the current trick, where offender's partner has an UI by the premature lead, and declarer is put into the position to prevent the use of this UI by requiring or forbidding plays by offender's partner.

In this example South is declarer in an nt contact and leads from the hand, West follows suit and the dummy plays ♣2. Before East follows suit West already leads ♠2 to the next trick, under the impression that East must have the ♠A. If there were no options for the declarer, East could win the trick with ♦A in order to at least get the trick with the ♥A. But thanks Law 57A South can require East to play his lowest ♦ card and so avoid an UI ruling (you never know if TD would get that right).

---

Karl

This is the correct understanding of Law 57A.
The apparent dilemma about which card is referred to in this law as the card led, Declarer's lead to the current trick or defender's lead out of turn to the next trick, is best resolved by recognizing that the latter "lead" has not yet taken place. So far it is just an exposed card and nothing more.

[blackshoe]

pran, on 2015-December-29, 13:51, said:

This is the correct understanding of Law 57A.
The apparent dilemma about which card is referred to in this law as the card led, Declarer's lead to the current trick or defender's lead out of turn to the next trick, is best resolved by recognizing that the latter "lead" has not yet taken place. So far it is just an exposed card and nothing more.

Not sure what I was thinking when I wrote that example, but you and Karl are right that it was not correct. OTOH, "when a defender leads to the next trick" seems pretty clear that the extra card from that defender is a lead to the next trick, and nothing to do with the current trick, except that the current trick is not yet over, since the other defender hasn't played to it yet.

In Karl's example, if declarer requires East to play his lowest diamond, the ♠2, which is a MPC, is led to trick 12, and declarer, or dummy actually, wins the last two tricks. If West hadn't screwed up, and if East is on the ball, declarer would get only one more trick.