BBO Discussion Forums: Lead Out Of Turn benefits offender? - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Lead Out Of Turn benefits offender?

#21 User is offline   barmar 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 21,589
  • Joined: 2004-August-21
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2016-October-30, 09:57

 blackshoe, on 2016-October-29, 16:37, said:

Well, yes, up to a point. If the defender has any reason from partnership agreement or experience to expect that the lead of an Ace might signify something other than the king, he has to say so. For example, would partner lead a singleton ace? Ace from ace doubleton? "Ace from ace-king" as an agreement usually comes about from discussions that start "king from ace-king *or* king-queen is ambiguous. Can we do better?" That discussion does not imply that when you decide "ace from ace-king" and partner leads the ace and you have the king, partner has departed from your agreements. If you have other agreements that might be germane, you must disclose them. Even if you think "obviously, everybody knows it might be a singleton". No, everybody does not know that.

If you have a specific agreement about whether you lead high or low from a singleton, you have to disclose it. I think it's ridiculous to have to disclose that you sometimes lead singletons.

If you disclose that you lead 4th best, do you also have to qualify it by saying that he might not necessarily be leading from a suit with at least 4 cards?

#22 User is offline   blackshoe 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,693
  • Joined: 2006-April-17
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Rochester, NY

Posted 2016-October-30, 13:56

When, in explaining your lead conventions, you say something like "we lead fourth highest" you are saying nothing about any other possible lead agreement. Indeed, every hand will have at least one four card or longer suit. So a bare "we lead fourth highest" implies that you always do that, whatever else you have in your hand. "That's ridiculous!" you say? I agree. But the point is what's required is full disclosure, not partial disclosure.
--------------------
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
0

#23 User is offline   barmar 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 21,589
  • Joined: 2004-August-21
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2016-October-31, 09:14

 blackshoe, on 2016-October-30, 13:56, said:

When, in explaining your lead conventions, you say something like "we lead fourth highest" you are saying nothing about any other possible lead agreement. Indeed, every hand will have at least one four card or longer suit. So a bare "we lead fourth highest" implies that you always do that, whatever else you have in your hand. "That's ridiculous!" you say? I agree. But the point is what's required is full disclosure, not partial disclosure.

Yes, every hand will have a 4-card suit. But sometimes there are reasons why you won't lead that suit, e.g. the opponents bid the suit during the auction. This should be general bridge knowledge. So "We lead 4th highest" doesn't imply "We always lead our 4-card suit". All it means is "If we're leading a suit of 4+ cards, we lead the 4th highest."

I also don't think anyone would expect that this means we lead x from KQJx.

#24 User is offline   blackshoe 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,693
  • Joined: 2006-April-17
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Rochester, NY

Posted 2016-October-31, 09:49

 barmar, on 2016-October-31, 09:14, said:

I also don't think anyone would expect that this means we lead x from KQJx.

Fair enough. What if it turns out that we do?
--------------------
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
0

#25 User is offline   Zelandakh 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,696
  • Joined: 2006-May-18
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 2016-October-31, 10:52

 blackshoe, on 2016-October-31, 09:49, said:

Fair enough. What if it turns out that we do?

"We always lead 4th highest from our longest suit irrespective of honour holdings or the auction"?
(-: Zel :-)
0

#26 User is offline   blackshoe 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,693
  • Joined: 2006-April-17
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Rochester, NY

Posted 2016-October-31, 11:29

 Zelandakh, on 2016-October-31, 10:52, said:

"We always lead 4th highest from our longest suit irrespective of honour holdings or the auction"?

So one hopes, I guess. ;)
--------------------
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
0

#27 User is offline   WellSpyder 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,627
  • Joined: 2009-November-30
  • Location:Oxfordshire, England

Posted 2016-November-01, 04:10

 Zelandakh, on 2016-October-31, 10:52, said:

"We always lead 4th highest from our longest suit irrespective of honour holdings or the auction"?

 blackshoe, on 2016-October-31, 11:29, said:

So one hopes, I guess. ;)

If you never get this explanation, but it is also true that no-one has such an agreement, have your hopes been met or not?
0

#28 User is offline   blackshoe 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,693
  • Joined: 2006-April-17
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Rochester, NY

Posted 2016-November-01, 07:16

Yes. No. Maybe. Have I left a base uncovered?
--------------------
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
0

#29 User is offline   weejonnie 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 801
  • Joined: 2012-April-11
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North-east England
  • Interests:Bridge Laws, croquet

Posted 2016-November-01, 09:32

 Vampyr, on 2016-October-30, 06:47, said:

This would be Even better if extended to whenever options are given , as it would allow a player to make an informed decision when an opponent makes an insufficient bid.

I would have thought that if someone leads out of turn or makes an insufficient bid then it is the next player's turn to play or call. For an opening lead out if turn it is fortuitous that the next player is the presumptive declarer.

At that point he can ask questions (as next player) and then can decide NOT to be the next player's turn to play or call. Once he does that then he can't. (If he refuses to accept the IB then play reverts to the IBer and once the IB has made a second call then he becomes the next player and can ask more questions (if he did not find out about the possibility that the IBer would make that call.)

So: no problem AFAICS
No matter how well you know the laws, there is always something that you'll forget. That is why we have a book.
Get the facts. No matter what people say, get the facts from both sides BEFORE you make a ruling or leave the table.
Remember - just because a TD is called for one possible infraction, it does not mean that there are no others.
In a judgement case - always refer to other TDs and discuss the situation until they agree your decision is correct.
The hardest rulings are inevitably as a result of failure of being called at the correct time. ALWAYS penalize both sides if this happens.
0

#30 User is offline   kevperk 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 118
  • Joined: 2007-April-03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Austin, Texas

Posted 2016-November-01, 12:29

I would always say, "From length, we lead fourth best"
0

#31 User is offline   blackshoe 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,693
  • Joined: 2006-April-17
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Rochester, NY

Posted 2016-November-01, 18:07

One could argue that, attention having been drawn to an irregularity and the director called, it's not anybody's turn to call or play until the director has made his ruling. Whether that precludes the player who has to make a choice from asking questions before making his choice is not, I think, addressed in the laws. If I have to interpret the law on this at the table, I'd say it does not preclude him asking — and getting answers, if the question is otherwise legit.
--------------------
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
0

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

3 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 3 guests, 0 anonymous users