except "2nt force [ ]" is in black on the cc.

Beware relying that — I can't remember what it is but I know that at least at one point (And maybe still) there's been something on the card whose color is incorrect.

From the ACBL alert procedures: So what I said above about a natural 2NT response being "almost" alertable was "almost" correct...

The CC is in agreement with the current regulation, yes.

I think the current regulation is objectively incorrect in this case.

I recognize the problem with "alert everything that is artificial" -- you get situations like alerting Stayman that doesn't help anyone -- I just don't think this falls into this case, partly because there are multiple artificial meanings for the bid which are in reasonably wide use (see: feature, Ogust), and partly because a natural 2NT, while not widely used, is at least plausible here. It's not definitionally a "self-altering" bid, which is basically what non-alertable artificial bids ought to be.

I think the general approach in Britain is to alert everything artificial and not alert everything natural nor any doubles, which sounds great on paper until you realize that the point of the alert procedure is to inform your opponents about your bidding, not to meet some aesthetic standard. In a world where 1NT – 2C [stayman] gets an alert but not to alert 1S (P) – 4C [splinter] (X) [asks for heart lead] is putting the cart before the horse imo.


Edit: Throw in the fact that in Britain they're much tougher on opponent's asking questions during the auction, in practice tending to penalize it any time one asks the meaning of an alert and then passes at that turn, and you have an alert procedure that serves more to obfuscate than to inform.

Of course, there will always be problems when there's a "normal" alertable meaning for a call and someone happens to playing an unusual one. For a little while I played, in the context of an otherwise mostly normal 2⁄1 system, that 1H – 3S! was a void splinter (with primary heart support obv) in an unknown suit... but of course most people who heard that sequence would assume the alerted spade bid was just a regular ol' splinter in spades. And imagine the fun when 1S – 4C! showed a splinter, specifically a singleton (no voids), in either clubs or hearts.

We didn't play this system long enough to get the opportunity to see someone double our "splinter" when it happened to be our secondary fit, but if we hadn't moved on to even wilder methods (which we pre-alerted), it would have happened. And I don't know an easy fix.

The "easy" fix is always ask.

It has to mean "always", though. Not just "most of the time".

And that leads to its own problems, of course.

Just got my copy of the Bridge Bulletin in the mail.

FMK on the cover!

Very nice.

Wow, and now on page 37... Chuckles with a 490 score on Its Your Call.

Brrrrr pictured on page 30.

I play with some serious players.

Yeah, requiring people to ask every time they hear 1NT – 2C would get a bit old.

Here's my proposal, which isn't easy in that it isn't simple, but would be fairly easy for people to learn and I think would be a substantial improvement over the current situation:

• All artificail calls are alerted, with the exception of a very few that are so nearly ubiquitous that this doesn't work; this list might actually be empty, but I could see Stayman on it, and first-round takeout and negative doubles.
• Almost no natural calls are alerted, except natural meanings in cases where an artficial call is on the above-referenced list (if it exists).
• There is no such thing as an announcement; that procedure is dropped.
• THere is no such thing as a delayed alert; that procedure is dropped.
• At his turn, an opponent may ask the meaning of any call, alterted or not. There is no penalty for doing so nor will there be any adjustment unless opponents can show damage likely resulting therefrom, or a pattern of gratuitous or malicious questioning. The former will be pretty rare, the latter almost unknown.
• In cases in which an unalterted call has a highly unusual connotation, it is permissible to alert.
• In any case of a highly unusual or unexpected meaning, the alert is not necessarily sufficient. It is the duty of the side making the highly unusual call to give the other side sufficient notice that they should inquire — they should not offer the meaning sua sponte, but if they deem it necessary, should give some sort of "special alert" or note that asking may be a good idea.
• If a side making a highly unusual call does not give the special notice described above, or if an altertable call is not alerted, there will be an adjusted score if the other side was damaged by not knowing the meaning of the call.
• If a side receives sufficient special notice to indicate that something unusual has happened, and does not inquire, they may not later claim damage.
• A pair may ask their opponents not to alert at all, or to alert only highly unusual calls. A pair making such a request may not later claim damage arising from compliance with the request. If requested not to alert, a pair should not do so, but there will be no penalty imposed for following the normal procedure except in cases of clear malice.
• In all cases of incorrect alerts or failure to alert, adjusted scores shall be given if damage is shown. If the "damaged" side actually knows the meaning, there is no damage. If the asking side has strong reason to believe that inquiry is appropriate but does not inquire, there is no damage.
• No penalty shall be imposed for failure to alert or for incorrect or insfficient or incorrect explanation unless without a demenstration of bad faith or a continuing pattern of failure to follow the procedure.
• A penalty shall be imposed, in addition to an adjusted score if there is damage, if any player is shown probably to have used unauthorized information arising from the alert or explanation procedure.

I have been receiving a monthly newspaper from my bridge district. Is there any way to remove myself from that mailing list?

Should probably include a link to BBO. Watching some of the people here play and asking questions doesn't hurt at all.

and watching some of them could hurt a great deal

edit: i keed, i keed. watching and asking questions is always good.

Fair point. Don't learn from watching me, or expect my answers are correct.

Speaking of which, less than 4 weeks to Toronto, and I have not played enough. Too. Many. Damned. Balls. In. The. Air. /sigh

Anyone up for playing tonight?

Happy birthday, Myrm.

IMPs w/r your deal

AJT75
Q642
86
72

P P 1C 2NT
P (??) 3H 4C 4H
????

Def pass the first time. Now I want to bid more but am undecided on whether to try 4S or 5C.

w/r means we are vulnerable and they are not?

I hurts me in my testicles that I have to open pass this hand. I usually would play a 2C opener either weak with both majors or any GF.

Anyway, I think the choice is between dbl and 5C. You can´t pass - you have an ace and you passed twice already.

imo 4S is not an option. Partner bid 4C when he could have doubled. He is not interested in anything else but his clubs.

What do I have for partner in 5C besides As? Not much, I think. Diamonds are on the right, LHO preferred to play hearts, so we have a decent chance that diamonds are going to be overruffed by LHO.

I think I dbl and lead clubs. See if we can put declarer´s trump length to the test.

w/r means we are white they are red, so they are vul, and we are not

I think either 4S or 5C should work out just fine -- a vulnerable opponent has voluntarily raised himself to game against non-vulnerable opponents. You really think he's saving against 4C here? If he has less than 12 red cards in his hand I'll be mildly shocked. Something like xx AKJxxx AQJxx - is probably not far from normal, which leaves partner with a bunch of clubs and something like honor-third in spades.

Do we play 3NT as gambling, and if so, what are the side suit requirements? Partner having Kxx - xxx AKQJxxx fits this auction pretty darn well IMO. I like my chances to find the spade queen on this auction if he doesn't have it.

I'll bid 4S, not really expecting to play it here. I mostly want to get partner off to the right lead against 6H (I'm not sure I'm letting them play 5H either).

gabe needs to join us on bbo sometime imo

I agree!

Gabe said he does not play bridge on-line, but I would hope he would make an exception for some POG games.

Sorry. I already had my bridge OD in my life and currently with family and stuff really not time to go and sit and play a couple of h playing bridge. ww at least I can play during working time

Anyway, the bidding problem changes quite a bit when they are vulnerable against not. I would probably bid 5C. I would certainly NOT bid 4S. I´m not going to warn opponents that I have the As. I don´t really need a spade lead vs a heart contract. They´re highly unlikely able to dispose of spade losers.

Thanks Wyman! I've been busy making my move to NYC so I've been MIA a few days; let me know if you want to play some time!

FU's alert proposal in #6184: generally a very good idea. (One thing I would want to add to the alert list: nonforcing new suit responses by unpassed responders.) "Alert all conventional bids except stayman and simple blackwood" worked very well at Swan online. (But we could never come to an agreement about what doubles needed alerted.)

myrmidon's district newsletter question in #6185: you can write to your district board rep and ask, but it's probably not something they are set up to do (e.g. they just get a list from ACBL of every address receiving a Bulletin in their district and send it.) Interesting your district still does this. Years ago these newsletters were bound inserts inside your Bulletin. ACBL charged so much for that that in my area they switched first to handing them out quarterly at regionals, then to online-only news.

Crazy people moving to NYC ~mumble~mumble~.

Siegmund, I think nonforcing new suit responses falls under my highly unusual provision (the seventh point), whereunder alerts are permitted and failure to do so means the partnership is liable if there's consequent damage. But I guess I can see putting it on the list. Nonforcing reverses fall in the same cataegory. At present, canapé systems get pre-alerted,¹ which I suppose is reasonable, and the actual reverse is alerted because of its "highly unusual or unexpected" meaning.)

Doubles are tricky. I can see someone who plays penalty doubles being annoyed that negative doubles are considered so standard that penalty get altered, but the real problem is that at high levels (of the auction and of the player), so many doubles have amorphous meanings; not sure how best to handle them.


¹ Playing a pre-alerted system in general chart events in the ACBL is perversely fun at first but gets very old in matchpoint events. When I used to play my home grown (really), highly aggressive (we opened most eight counts at the one level), semi-relay (barely legal) strong club system with canapé bids and many other highly unusual (not kidding at all) sequences, we eventually pared our pre-alerts to barely-helpful minimum — the message was little more than "prepare for weirdness", but that turned out to be all opponents wanted the great majority of the time.