Lead Out Of Turn benefits offender?

[blackshoe]

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

So one hopes, I guess. ;)

[WellSpyder]

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

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?

[blackshoe]

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

[weejonnie]

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

[kevperk]

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

[blackshoe]

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.