[blml] Amnesia

[Tim West-Meads]

Roger wrote:
> 
> hmmm.  This may indeed get interesting.  I'm not sure about 
> distinctions here.  Is presumed dummy the same as dummy, or does it 
> make a difference subsequent the OL?  If there is no dummy until it 
> is faced, I do not think it is valid to say that dummy has done 
> anything until after dummy is faced. I think something like that has 
> been argued but I wouldn't put money on it, yet.

Well, before an opening lead is faced he is "presumed dummy", after an 
opening lead is faced he is "dummy".  By law the transition from one 
state to another happens at exactly the instant that the lead is faced.
> 55A.    Declarer's Lead Accepted
> If declarer has led out of turn from his or dummy's hand, either 
> defender may accept the lead as provided in Law 53, or require its 
> retraction (after misinformation, see Law 47E1).
> 
> 
> 
> L55A gives defenders the option to accept Declarer's named card from 
> dummy. I am thinking that it does not apply when dummy acts on his on 
> volition.  It being arguable whether it was dummy or presumed dummy 
> that acted.
> 
> but....
> 
> 53A.    Lead Out of Turn Treated as Correct Lead
> Any lead faced out of turn may be treated as a correct lead.
>
> This is unequivocal, imo.

Indeed.  It is perfectly legal for NOS to accept the lead (verbally or 
by following)

> 54A. Declarer Spreads His Hand
> After a faced opening lead out of turn, declarer may spread his hand; 
> he becomes dummy, and dummy becomes declarer.

No longer an option because of Law54c.

> 47E2.   Retraction of Play
> (a)     No One Has Subsequently Played
> 
>         ...... An opening lead may not be retracted after dummy has 
> faced any card.

Agreed - no retraction allowed.
 
> After all is said and done.  Whatever option is chosen, dummy's OLOOT 
> may not be retracted.

But that is irrelevant.  Sure OS don't get a chance to "retract" but, 
presuming someone has drawn attention to the fiasco, we still have to 
apply "the card must be withdrawn" from L45D.  Note "withdrawn", not 
"retracted".  This is a "must" and carried out at the instruction of the 
TD not an option.

As I said trickier but soluble.  OK, the laws aren't perfect for the 
situation - whatever I do, Roger does, or Sven does requires a bit of 
verbal squeezing.  I believe my approach is workable and at least as 
good a fit for the law as any other.  It's not the only such approach 
but we don't get the option of saying "The laws don't cover this - 
please go away."

Tim