Dear Ed & Peter,

After some questioning my opponents reveal that they have a system for opening leads whereby - a small odd card means one thing, a high odd card means another, a low even card means something else and a high even card has yet another meaning.
Is this legal?

Thanks,
Bill Macmillan

Reply from Ed Hoogenkamp ('South'):

Dear Bill,

As far as I know you can play any system for signalling (and therefore opening leads as well) you want (except using parts of your body...). But there are some conditions:
Firstly: the method must be explained clearly on the convention card.
Secondly: if the method is very uncommon, like the one you describe, I think its users should alert their opponents before play starts - I think!

I am not sure whether this is the way it is described in the Laws all over the world, but I definitely think it should.

I think Peter signals as follows: left foot on the table, low club = spades preference. Right foot on the table, left hand on top of his head, low club = hearts preference.... or reverse, I always forget.

If he stands on his head and is moving his feet like a windmill, always play diamonds!

Un saludo desde Barcelona

Reply from Peter van der Linden ('North'):

Dear Bill,

You do not give the meaning of every case you mention (e.g. what exactly does the lead of a small odd card mean?).
As long as declarer can 'read' the signals* and is given full disclosure about the methods of signalling (and therefore also of leading) I think anything goes - provided of course signalling is only done by playing cards, rather than by sounds and/or movements (this is what Ed is trying to say when writing 'using parts of your body' and all this stuff about my supposed use of legs and whatever).
However I do not think it is compulsory to alert opponents before the play. After all, declarer can ask about the agreements in signalling at any time during the play.

* There is one exception. It concerns 'Veiled signals' ('Veil signals'?). This is a direct translation from Dutch ('Sluiersignalen') and therefore probably not known as such in English. I have not been able to find the English expression (on 15 December Martin Sinot informed us he has, read his addition below my answer, -Peter). These signals are illegal in most matches since they contain a message declarer cannot decipher as he lacks the 'key' - for these signals are coded!
I will try to explain: suppose declarer is known (from the bidding) to hold an even number in a particular suit (for instance: he has replied two in a major over his partner's Stayman-enquiry). The opponent who is to lead, playing 'Veil signals', will now:
- Either lead according to system A (e.g. fourth best) if holding an even number in the 'known' suit
- Or lead according to system B (e.g. odd leads) if holding an odd number of cards in the 'known' suit.
More concrete: Suppose declarer South is known to hold four spades. West leads the ♥2.
- This ♥2 is fourth best if West has an even number of spades.
- This ♥2 is an odd lead (third or fifth best) if West has an odd number of spades.
Note that declarer cannot 'decode' the message since he does not know whether West has an even or odd number of spades.
East, however, can decode the message: he knows declarer has four (an even number) of spades and by looking at dummy's and his own number of spades he can deduct whether West has an even or odd number of spades and thus whether the lead is fourth best or odd.
Since declarer lacks full disclosure, this method is illegal in most matches (or even in all; I am not sure).
From your description I take it your opponents do not play veil signals, but I am not sure.

To conclude with: funny Ed should mention me supposedly moving like a windmill. After all, the link between windmills and Spain is - of course - Don Quixote.
That noble man is commonly considered to have been rather eccentric. But what is eccentric? Now read Ed's comment once more and I think you will agree the good Don was perfectly normal - compared to Ed that is.

En hils fra Orkanger.

PS: Ed is wrong by the way; I use finger-signals since these can be seen by partner when table screens are being used. Foot-signals are so passé, Ed... :-)

 Reaction from Martin Sinot (15 January 2010)

Hello Ed and Peter,

About the 'Illegal Signals': the term you are looking for when translating 'Sluiersignalen' is probably 'Encrypted signals': the signals are 'encrypted' such that partner can decode the signal, but declarer cannot.
They are mentioned under this name in the HUM/BSC regulations and indeed forbidden if you use those rules (strongly recommended).

Regards,
Martin Sinot

Thank you very much, Martin. 
For readers who wonder: HUM = Highly Unusual Methods, BSC = Brown Sticker Methods, - Ed & Peter