change of an intended call
Hello ,
If possible please clarify the case indicated below.
S opens the bidding with 1nt and after a certain time changes his mind an replaces it with 1D . Before W makes any call
E calls the director . TD decides that 1nt cannot be changed because of its being intended call. While 1D is being removed by S
W tells " hold on please . I accept 1D"
a) After the TD has appeared and ruled Does W still have the right to make a choice? Even it is against the Director's decision.
b) İs The director obliged to accept W's demand? Or object it saying that you should have overcalled 1D before I was called.
It is now too late.
Looking forward to receiving from you.
Regards.
Secaaddin Özdeniz.
Comments
I believe Law 25B1 applies here - the offending player's LHO (West here) always has the right to accept the new bid (1D here). The fact that the director is called is not a problem and is encouraged if either side believe there has been an irregularity. The director should check whether West wants to accept the 1D open anyway.
Lead restrictions will apply if NS become the defending side.
The Director's decision should start by asking West whether or not they accept the bid (Law 25B1). So in the scenario you've listed, there was a Director error (albeit one that's easy to correct; West has probably rescued the Director here). Obviously, it isn't too late for the Director to change an incorrect ruling to a correct ruling upon prompting by West.
On a side note: are there lead restrictions if an intended call is changed to a comparable call? This is very unlikely to happen in practice, of course, but it could happen if two calls have exactly the same meaning (I have a partnership where two calls are agreed to have the same meaning, with no distinction between them, as a method of partially compensating for system forgets).
The Direstor should start by informing West that they will have the option to accept the bid, but West will not be given the opportunity to exercise that option until 'the Director has explained all matters in regard to rectification' (Law 9B2) and the Director has explained all the options available' (Law 10C).
Absolutely correct ... however, the 1H bid hit the table somewhere between the bid and but ... now what?