[blml] Has declarer lead from dummy?

[John Probst]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Eitan Levy" <moranl at netvision.net.il>
To: "John Probst" <john at asimere.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 06, 2006 4:29 PM
Subject: Re: [blml] Has declarer lead from dummy?


> I'm with you on this one, John.
> Reading 45B (or maybe misreading it on purpose?): Declarer has not yet 
> finished the action of playing a card as dummy has not yet picked it up 
> and faced it.
> So we go to 45 C4(a) to see if it is nevertheless considered played. No, 
> it was designated, but not designated as the card he PROPOSED to play.

I'll settle for Shoder, Levy and Probst. :)  thanks guys :)
>
> I know I'm stretching it a bit ("decide what you want to rule, and then 
> find a law")  - but let the defender appeal.
>
> I missed being at Brighton this year - i hope i'll be there again next 
> year.
> Cheers
> Eitan
>
>
> At 05:19 PM 08-08-06 +0100, you wrote:
>>This one got me to phone DWS. What do you think?
>>
>>Declarer is cashing a long suit from hand, pitching small side suit cards
>>from dummy and he holds all the remaining cards of the suit. He is playing
>>quickly. His brain beats his hand and he says "heart deuce" (a card in
>>dummy) before he plays the next winner from his hand. RHO snaps a heart 
>>onto
>>the table. Declarer says "Hang on I haven't played yet.". From this it is
>>clear that declarer knows he's in hand and knows he's about to lead to 
>>this
>>trick from hand.  These are the *facts* - don't argue with them.
>>
>>Has declarer led OOT from dummy or has the trick not yet started, and
>>therefore the lead is still in his hand and we can pick up the 2 cards
>>currently in the played position with all the usual UI/AI constraints?
>>
>>I ruled he was still in hand, and DWS wan't sure feeling it was, at least, 
>>a
>>tenable ruling. I think it's a tough one.  John
>>
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>blml mailing list
>>blml at amsterdamned.org
>>http://www.amsterdamned.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
>