[portia2]

My LHO opened 3S and I doubled out of rotation (It was my partner's bid). Opener did not accept my Double. Looking at law 32A, my bid is cancelled and my partner HAS to pass. At our table my RHO (knowing that I wanted to double) bid 4S. Am I free to bid as I please (whether it be pass, double or another suit) and does my partner get to bid when it is his turn on the next round ( or can he only pass)? Thanks

[sfi]

You actually want Law 32B:

Quote

B. Offender’s Partner’s Turn to Call
If a double or redouble out of rotation has been made when it was the offender’s partner’s turn to call, then:
1. Offender’s partner may make any legal call, but Law 16C2 applies.
2. Offender may make any legal call at his proper turn and the Director rules as in A2(a) or A2(b) above.

So partner can do what they like over 3S, although they are not entitled to the information that you wanted to double 3S. If you make a comparable call at your first turn, all is good. If not, then partner is required to pass at their next turn to act and there may be lead penalties if you wind up defending.

You can choose whatever action you want whenever it is your turn to call.

[pran]

sfi, on 2019-December-30, 14:05, said:

If you make a comparable call at your first turn, all is good. If not, then partner is required to pass at their next turn to act and there may be lead penalties if you wind up defending.

This clause only applies if your RHO bids, doubles or redoubles at his first turn to call!

[sfi]

pran, on 2019-December-30, 14:24, said:

This clause only applies if your RHO bids, doubles or redoubles at his first turn to call!

Upon rereading it, I don't see what distinction you are trying to make.

[blackshoe]

Let's start at the beginning. The pertinent facts in this case are that OP doubled his LHO at his partner's turn to call, and LHO, who opened the bidding, did not accept the double. So...

Quote

LAW 29 PROCEDURE AFTER A CALL OUT OF ROTATION
A. Forfeiture of Right to Rectification
Following a call out of rotation offender’s LHO may elect to call thereby forfeiting the right to any rectification.
B. Out-of-Rotation Call Cancelled
Unless A applies, a call out of rotation is cancelled and the auction reverts to the player whose turn it was to call. The offending side is subject to the provisions of Law 30, 31 or 32.
C. Call Out of Rotation Is Artificial
If a call out of rotation is artificial, the provisions of Laws 30, 31 and 32 apply to the denomination(s) specified, rather than the denomination named.

LHO did not elect to call, except perhaps to call the director. So 29A doesn't apply. The double is cancelled, and the auction reverts to doubler's partner, who is "subject to the provisions" of Law 32.

Quote

LAW 32 DOUBLE OR REDOUBLE OUT OF ROTATION
A double or redouble out of rotation may be accepted at the option of the opponent next in rotation (see Law 29A), except that an inadmissible double or redouble (see Law 36) may never be accepted. If the call out of rotation is not accepted it is cancelled and:
…
B. Offender’s Partner’s Turn to Call
If a double or redouble out of rotation has been made when it was the offender’s partner’s turn to call, then:
1. Offender’s partner may make any legal call, but Law 16C2 applies.
2. Offender may make any legal call at his proper turn and the Director rules as in A2(a) or A2(b) above.
C. Later Calls at LHO’s Turn to Call
Later calls at LHO’s turn to call are treated as changes of call and Law 25 applies.

Per §1, offender's partner can bid what he wants, subject to Law 16C2.

Quote

Law 16C. Information from Withdrawn Calls and Plays
When a call or play has been withdrawn as these laws provide:
…
2. For an offending side, information arising from its own withdrawn action and from withdrawn actions of the non-offending side is unauthorized. A player of an offending side may not choose a call or play that is demonstrably suggested over another by unauthorized information if the other call or play is a logical alternative.

Partner cannot base his call on information arising from offender's double if he has a logical alternative (LA) to his chosen call and the chosen call is demonstrably suggested over the LA by that information.

Per §2 offender can make any legal call, and the director rules as in:

Quote

2. If offender’s RHO bids, doubles or redoubles, the offender may in turn make any legal call:
(a) When the call is a comparable call (see Law 23A), there is no further rectification. Law 26B does not apply, but see Law 23C.
(b) When the call is not a comparable call (see Law 23A), offender’s partner must pass when next it is his turn to call. Laws 16C, 26B and 72C may apply.

As I read this, Law 31A1, which deals with what happens if offender's RHO passes when offender has doubled or redoubled at RHO's turn to call, does not apply here, so in the instant case if RHO passes, offender can do what he wants; the comparable call law (see below) does not apply. This opinion may be controversial.

Quote

LAW 23 COMPARABLE CALL
A. Definition
A call that replaces a withdrawn call is a comparable call, if it:
1. has the same or similar meaning as that attributable to the withdrawn call, or
2. defines a subset of the possible meanings attributable to the withdrawn call, or
3. has the same purpose (e.g. an asking bid or a relay) as that attributable to the withdrawn call.
B. No Rectification
When a call is cancelled (as per Law 29B) and the offender chooses at his proper turn to replace the irregularity with a comparable call, then both the auction and play continue without further rectification. Law 16C2 does not apply, but see C following.
C. Non-Offending Side Damaged
If following the substitution of a comparable call [see Laws 27B1(b), 30B1(b)(i), 31A2(a) and 32A2(a)] the Director judges at the end of the play that without the assistance gained through the infraction the outcome of the board could well have been different, and in consequence the non-offending side is damaged, he shall award an adjusted score [see Law 12C1(b)].

Note that if the double was for takeout, it is artificial, so Law 29C (see above) applies, although frankly I don't see it mattering here.

[jhenrikj]

In $2, you do not go to 32A2, you go directly to 32A2(a) or (b). The first lines in 32A2 does not apply when redirected from 32B. What actions your RHO takes is irrelevant.

[blackshoe]

Then it seems like the law writers were engaging in false economy, putting fewer words over more clarity.

[jhenrikj]

If they send you specifically to a subsection of a law, why should you go anywhere else? This technique is used in some other places as well when the law says " the lead restrictions in law 26B might apply", this does not mean law 26 applies.

[pran]

jhenrikj, on 2019-December-30, 19:23, said:

In $2, you do not go to 32A2, you go directly to 32A2(a) or (b). The first lines in 32A2 does not apply when redirected from 32B. What actions your RHO takes is irrelevant.

Yes, I think that is correct.

[blackshoe]

Fair enough.

[barmar]

Also notice that 32B2 specifically says "Offender may make any legal call at his proper turn", which reiterates what 32A2 says. If 32A1 applied, this would be a direct contradiction.