[Coelacanth]

The topic title derives not from the difficulty of the ruling but from the fact that I actually woke up in the middle of the night thinking about this scenario.

First round of a matchpoint club game, East deals and opens 2♠. South and West both pass. North has removed his cards from teh board but has not sorted or even looked at them. When the auction reaches him, he's still fumbling around, arranging his bid box, trying to figure out where to set his drink, etc. Unfortunately, when he picks up the Bridgemate to enter in the player numbers, the rest of the players (also suffering from first-round distraction) assume that he is actually entering in the contract of 2♠. South leads a card, unfortunately face up, and West tables the dummy.

North finally returns his attention to the table, realizes something is very amiss, and summons the Director.

How do you rule?

[barmar]

I rule that you have to stop eating spicy food before going to bed.

[dicklont]

Redeal, easy!

[axman]

Coelacanth, on 2011-July-28, 08:09, said:

The topic title derives not from the difficulty of the ruling but from the fact that I actually woke up in the middle of the night thinking about this scenario.

First round of a matchpoint club game, East deals and opens 2♠. South and West both pass. North has removed his cards from teh board but has not sorted or even looked at them. When the auction reaches him, he's still fumbling around, arranging his bid box, trying to figure out where to set his drink, etc. Unfortunately, when he picks up the Bridgemate to enter in the player numbers, the rest of the players (also suffering from first-round distraction) assume that he is actually entering in the contract of 2♠. South leads a card, unfortunately face up, and West tables the dummy.

North finally returns his attention to the table, realizes something is very amiss, and summons the Director.

How do you rule?

The specifications of L22A2 not having been satisfied the auction is still in progress.

L24 provides the procedure for dealing with the exposed card.

[iviehoff]

axman, on 2011-July-28, 09:17, said:

The specifications of L22A2 not having been satisfied the auction is still in progress.
L24 provides the procedure for dealing with the exposed card.

And L24 law says North must now pass. As a defender, South's exposed card is a penalty card, and since he is now on lead that just means he has to lead it.

As a ruling, it's no nightmare. As to whether it's a nightmare for NS, that depends whether defending 2S is half sensible or not. If not, maybe South will now learn not to lead face up.

[Cyberyeti]

Is there a requirement for E to wait for N to have looked at his cards and confirm he has 13 ? or is this just good manners ? I couldn't find one in the laws, but do any national organizations require this ?

If so, both sides are now offending and it gets a lot more complicated.

[aguahombre]

iviehoff, on 2011-July-28, 09:37, said:

And L24 law says North must now pass. As a defender, South's exposed card is a penalty card, and since he is now on lead that just means he has to lead it.

As a ruling, it's no nightmare. As to whether it's a nightmare for NS, that depends whether defending 2S is half sensible or not. If not, maybe South will now learn not to lead face up.

Yes, but it seems now we must decide if E/W were damaged by the pass enforced upon North; and whether to adjust or call it the "cut of the green" if N/S get a lucky result defending 2S as opposed to whatever would have happened normally. (L23)

[axman]

iviehoff, on 2011-July-28, 09:37, said:

And L24 law says North must now pass. As a defender, South's exposed card is a penalty card, and since he is now on lead that just means he has to lead it.

As a ruling, it's no nightmare. As to whether it's a nightmare for NS, that depends whether defending 2S is half sensible or not. If not, maybe South will now learn not to lead face up.

While S may well have believed he was leading, as the auction is not over I believe that the card has the status of an exposed card rather than a card led. And at such a point it is not yet known whether L24 provides that N must pass.

[Coelacanth]

axman, on 2011-July-28, 11:14, said:

While S may well have believed he was leading, as the auction is not over I believe that the card has the status of an exposed card rather than a card led. And at such a point it is not yet known whether L24 provides that N must pass.

I think south's "lead" falls under the purview of L24B as a "card prematurely led". This will enforce a pass on North so the contract will indeed be 2♠ by East. Since L24 makes South's lead a major penalty card, he must lead it anyway. The only part of this that "feels wrong" is that West's facing of his entire hand during the auction is subject to no rectification.

Suppose, however, that south's card was accidentally exposed and was a non-honor. West, assuming that it was the opening lead, still puts down his hand as dummy. North decides to overcall 3♣, East must pass per L24C. If South passes and West balances with 3♥, suppose North competes with 4♣. East is not barred (his L24C-enforced pass only applied to his "next" turn to call) but his knowledge of the entirety of partner's hand is UI. Let's say EW are not vulnerable and East has opened a "quirky" weak-two with 6=5=2=0 or the like. Given that partner's 3♥ call is AI to him, it may well be that pass is not an LA and we must allow East to bid 4♥. 4♥ makes; now is there any adjustment?

Yes I know this whole thing is far-fetched.

[axman]

Coelacanth, on 2011-July-28, 14:04, said:

I think south's "lead" falls under the purview of L24B as a "card prematurely led". This will enforce a pass on North so the contract will indeed be 2♠ by East. Since L24 makes South's lead a major penalty card, he must lead it anyway. The only part of this that "feels wrong" is that West's facing of his entire hand during the auction is subject to no rectification.

Suppose, however, that south's card was accidentally exposed and was a non-honor. West, assuming that it was the opening lead, still puts down his hand as dummy. North decides to overcall 3♣, East must pass per L24C. If South passes and West balances with 3♥, suppose North competes with 4♣. East is not barred (his L24C-enforced pass only applied to his "next" turn to call) but his knowledge of the entirety of partner's hand is UI. Let's say EW are not vulnerable and East has opened a "quirky" weak-two with 6=5=2=0 or the like. Given that partner's 3♥ call is AI to him, it may well be that pass is not an LA and we must allow East to bid 4♥. 4♥ makes; now is there any adjustment?

Yes I know this whole thing is far-fetched.

As there is no contract to lead to, the exposed card is not yet [until there is a contract] a lead. For all that is known, S may well be<come> declarer.

[aguahombre]

axman, on 2011-July-28, 14:39, said:

As there is no contract to lead to, the exposed card is not yet [until there is a contract] a lead. For all that is known, S may well be<come> declarer.

If you don't think there is a final contract after a bid and 3 passes (the final pass dictated by L24), then your point is valid.

Contrary to that, I see no other way to read the words in L24 than that the auction is over.

[axman]

aguahombre, on 2011-July-28, 14:59, said:

If you don't think there is a final contract after a bid and 3 passes (the final pass dictated by L24), then your point is valid.

Contrary to that, I see no other way to read the words in L24 than that the auction is over.

At the time S exposed his card N had not called and thus the auction was not over, andsupposed isnnot over until that 3rd pass in rotation has actually been made. Presumably N has taken the position that he did not call and has done nothing that might be construed to be a call such as entering 2S as the contract by E [in the bridgemate]. The peculiarity that N had not yet inspected his cards is de facto conclusive that N had not called in this instance.

[aguahombre]

And, yet he must pass because of what happened.

[blackshoe]

The wording of Law 24 is unfortunate, since it seems to say that once a player who has exposed a card during the auction becomes a defender, there may retroactively be restrictions on his partner's calls — in an auction that is now over.

I see no reason why West's exposure of his entire hand should not also be subject to Law 24.

[pran]

blackshoe, on 2011-July-28, 16:36, said:

The wording of Law 24 is unfortunate, since it seems to say that once a player who has exposed a card during the auction becomes a defender, there may retroactively be restrictions on his partner's calls — in an auction that is now over.

I see no reason why West's exposure of his entire hand should not also be subject to Law 24.

It is!

The proper ruling sequence is:
South exposes a card during the auction.
West exposes his entire hand (also) during the auction.
Attention is called to these irregularities and North is forced to pass (once?) because of South's irregularity.
As it is North's turn to call this rectification takes effect immediately, and North's forced pass concludes the auction with East becoming Declarer.
South has a penalty card which he must now play as his opening lead.
As West becomes Dummy there is no further rectification from West having exposed (all his) cards during the auction.

[blackshoe]

Yes, of course. I was responding to Coelecanth's "West's exposure of his whole hand is subject to no rectification". It's subject to whatever rectification Law 24 provides. It's only the chance occurrence that he becomes dummy that saves him from that. Besides, look at the purpose of rectification — what could EW possibly gain from the exposure, in this case? Nothing, I would say. So "no rectification" is no problem.

[the hog]

dicklont, on 2011-July-28, 08:46, said:

Redeal, easy!

With set hands? Not so easy.

[Coelacanth]

blackshoe, on 2011-July-28, 18:20, said:

Yes, of course. I was responding to Coelecanth's "West's exposure of his whole hand is subject to no rectification". It's subject to whatever rectification Law 24 provides. It's only the chance occurrence that he becomes dummy that saves him from that. Besides, look at the purpose of rectification — what could EW possibly gain from the exposure, in this case? Nothing, I would say. So "no rectification" is no problem.

This is correct, of course.

What I was referring to is the fact that on this particular auction, South's exposure of one card has enforced a pass on his partner. This had the effect of preventing North from competing on a hand where he otherwise would. It also commits South to an opening lead that he likely would not have made had North been allowed to bid. (There must be a corollary of Goldwater's rule that says a player who doesn't know whether the auction is over is probably not making the best opening lead.) West's exposure of 13 cards has had absolutely no impact on the result of the hand.

[blackshoe]

Cyberyeti, on 2011-July-28, 09:50, said:

Is there a requirement for E to wait for N to have looked at his cards and confirm he has 13?

No.

Coelacanth, on 2011-July-28, 14:04, said:

I think south's "lead" falls under the purview of L24B as a "card prematurely led". This will enforce a pass on North so the contract will indeed be 2♠ by East. Since L24 makes South's lead a major penalty card, he must lead it anyway. The only part of this that "feels wrong" is that West's facing of his entire hand during the auction is subject to no rectification.

Suppose, however, that south's card was accidentally exposed and was a non-honor.

Not only is it far-fetched, it's a different problem to the one you posed originally. Let's try not to confuse the thread.

axman, on 2011-July-28, 14:39, said:

As there is no contract to lead to, the exposed card is not yet [until there is a contract] a lead. For all that is known, S may well be<come> declarer.

Whether it was a lead or not depends on what south thought he was doing. The TD will ask him, and his answer will tell us which it is. In practice, for the forum, that it was a lead was specified in the OP. This business about "there's no contract to lead to" is, frankly, BS.

[bluejak]

Cyberyeti, on 2011-July-28, 09:50, said:

Is there a requirement for E to wait for N to have looked at his cards and confirm he has 13 ? or is this just good manners ? I couldn't find one in the laws, but do any national organizations require this ?

If so, both sides are now offending and it gets a lot more complicated.

Well, now, many people consider it good manners. So perhaps the Law you are looking for is 74.