[csdenmark]

Today I have had a complaint for failing not to alert properly. I dont like such compliants - especially as it seems the complaint is correct according to ACBL rulings. Right now I am not quite sure what the rules really are but the discussions this caused shows that nearly all bids are alert requering.

Roland was very helpful to provide this link: http://www.blakjak.d...uk/acbl_alt.htm I have not studied yet but I am told what I can expect to find there.

Can we live with rules stating something like all bids meaning something are alert requering and must be explained too. I understand that are the rules for professionals and that the top players are receiving a lot of penalties for breaking those rules.

But what are the rules we can live with here on BBO?

[Mirjam_3]

i think it depends of the place you play... in main u can agree on what to alert at the table u play and in tournaments the td can have own rules:
f.e. i use in my tournaments that players shouldt alert all non natural bids and i can live with it since not all players are usa players but we all know which bids are not natural...

[aisha759]

Alertable bids have evolved I noticed.... Take transfers as an example: nobody seems to alert those anymore, as we take them for granted....but should be alerted ( i was told)
There was a time when 1nt opening bids were not alertable as they were known to be 16-18pts (that was a long time ago)... players now alert the weak 1nt and fail to alert the 16-18, because the standard (sayc) 1nt openings are 15-17.
I played against opponents who bid a 1nt with 16-18pts, did not alert ( i automatically took it for 15-17)... my partner and myself were damaged by it, but didn't pursue the matter.... my question is? is a 1nt opening with 16-18pts alertable nowadays?
I went into that link Claus, but its a very detailed one and will read it eventually.
Self alerts are a bit different than alerting when playing live bridge, in the sense that if you make a bid, and your partner fails to alert, there is a possibility he did not understand the bid was an unusual one, which could give away some information (of course at the end of the bidding opps can always back track and ask what each bid meant). On line, partner does not see it, so the concept is totally different.... i may have gone off track here, but at least, it's still about alerts, so yes, what are BBO rules about alerts?

[spwdo]

hi

i still think that every conventionel bid shoud be alerted to make no misunderstanding, so whatever u p has as info shoud be given to opps as well .Acbl rules are made for and in northamerica and dont cover several bids frequently used in acbl tourneys,cue bids , 2!C 2 !D and so on, seems strange when u play polish players wondering why they have to alert almost every bid and sayc players hardly anything.


Not needed to explain everything , just prealert, and explain when ask.

Maybe we shoud like on some other sites obligate posting a convention, not that hard work and very appreciated by all when u do it.

This is a worldwide site and we shoud not focus on what one particulary bridge organisation has to say about it. If someone host a table/tourneys with acbl rules thats fine and u shoud as player uphold those laws.

If somebody hosts tourneys/table with specific rules we shoud follow them, the alert all vonventionel bids is getting rather common amoung bbo tourneys and i think it is a good thing.


BBO TD FRIENDS

[Free]

WOW! Major déjà vu!! I think I've seen this thread already 10 times... Can someone provide a link plz?

[csdenmark]

The special case here was a normal response in precision.

1♣ open - alerted as 16+,any
2♣ response - not alerted. 5+cd,8+HcP,game force.

The 2♣ bid was the complaint. Wayne provided the complaint and a very confusing talk at the table, for me it was confusing as I did not know, showed that all bids was alert requering. Standard 1♦ openings, standard 5cd major etc. Only pass if it means nothing at all was free.

I dont think this is right even it may be correct international rules. I think if this is international rules - we will not be able to play online bridge and apply to international standard.

[spwdo]

csdenmark, on May 11 2004, 08:53 AM, said:

The special case here was a normal response in precision.

1♣ open - alerted as 16+,any
2♣ response - not alerted. 5+cd,8+HcP,game force.

The 2♣ bid was the complaint.

hi,


is it gameforce? yes, specail meaning for you and your partner, look at all that info that bid carries to partner and it is a gameforce bid, prealert and explain when asked i think.


much fuss about nothing, cant believe why players woudnt alert .Im always happy to alert a bid , means my partner and i agreed on something and im pretty sure he/she knows what bid ment


marc

[the hog]

Marc,
Claus is right. If you are playing Precision a positive is a GF, and if not alerted is natural. Anyone who has been playing for a month knows this. 2C hardly needs to be alerted and it is hardly a "special" meaning for you and your partner".

What about those who don't alert Stayman or transfers? Is this also a "special treatment for you and your partner"? If you want pre alerts for this then pre alert "1C - 1H to 7NT is a game force". Pretty silly, huh!

Going by your own comment a couple of posts earlier - "i still think that every conventionel bid shoud be alerted to make no misunderstanding"
Claus' 2C bid here is NOT a conventional bid. This is just another example of someone kicking up a fuss because Claus is not playing the same system as they are. In fact I would fine the complainants.

[Shrike]

Hog, you're right that the 2C bid is natural. You're also right that anyone who has played against a strong club will know what it means. And you're right that the opponents were probably fussing over nothing, even if it's technically an alertable bid -- they probably knew, and even if not were probably not damaged.

However. . . some people have not played against precision. If the opps were new, they are entitled to an alert of a sequence that to them probably (depending on what they're familiar with, I know, but let's guess it's not precision) sounded weaker than a GF. An alert seems not only potentially helpful, but appropriate; I think it should be required.

Under ACBL rules, in case that's what the opps thought applied (wrongly, if so), the bid is definitely alertable, as are all other responses to a precison club. Reason: though natural (they show length and/or strength in the suit bid), they are of a strength that is "highly unusual or unexpected." I know, it's not unexpected to a non-novice in the context of a strong club opening, provided the opps are familiar with such auctions, but that's not how it's decided.

[the hog]

It might be alertable under ACBL regs, I don't know. It is also hardly unexpected length or strength. It is definitely NOT alertable under ABF regs, and thats the rub. When you say technically alertable, technically alertable by whom? The ACBL? Bbo is NOT regulated by ACBL regs and why should it be when it is frequented by people from many different countries. (Thank heavens it isn't either, but thats another story).
Stayman is alertable here, (Oz). How would you feel if I kick up a stink because you did not alert it? Probably tell me to !@## and rightly so.

To follow from your quote:
"but that's not how it's decided. "
the problem is there IS NO policy on how it is decided.

[Gerard]

I do not understand why all this fuss, really. The most standard system that is in use on BBO is SAYC, as described in the SAYC convention card as posted. This is the fundamental bidding system that BBO has adopted for all players, no matter where they reside in the world. Any bid that is not featured in that convention card should be alerted. Those who do not play SAYC should still read it and know the difference of meaning between the bids they use per their system and the same bid in SAYC. If the meaning is different, simply alert and explain the difference.

Taking the case of this afternoon, the Precision 1C opening showed almost any 16+ points hand and should be alerted, because it is different from the SAYC 1C opening bid.
the Precision 1S response to 1C is game force, promises 8+ points and a 5 card spade suit. This is also different from the SAYC meaning of 1!S response to 1C. Therefore, it should be alerted too. As a matter of fact, when the auction starts with a Precision 1C bid, any subsequent bid has a meaning different from the same bid in SAYC and should be alerted.

Now, one of the opponents demanded that the board be skipped because of the lack of alert of 1S. I disagree with that. I have personally and observed many times that people ask and receive undoes after 1,2,3 and sometimes 4 bids were made after their so called misclick. If that player felt that he had missed on something because of the lack of alert, he could have asked for the auction to revert to him right after the 1S response. By the way, I saw it done in ACBL live tourneys. You may argue, sure, but then let's argue on the misuse of the so called misclicks too

[spwdo]

Gerard, on May 11 2004, 02:20 PM, said:

I do not understand why all this fuss, really. The most standard system that is in use on BBO is SAYC, as described in the SAYC convention card as posted. This is the fundamental bidding system that BBO has adopted for all players, no matter where they reside in the world. Any bid that is not featured in that convention card should be alerted. Those who do not play SAYC should still read it and know the difference of meaning between the bids they use per their system and the same bid in SAYC. If the meaning is different, simply alert and explain the difference.

Taking the case of this afternoon, the Precision 1C opening showed almost any 16+ points hand and should be alerted, because it is different from the SAYC 1C opening bid.
the Precision 1S response to 1C is game force, promises 8+ points and a 5 card spade suit. This is also different from the SAYC meaning of 1!S response to 1C. Therefore, it should be alerted too. As a matter of fact, when the auction starts with a Precision 1C bid, any subsequent bid has a meaning different from the same bid in SAYC and should be alerted.

Now, one of the opponents demanded that the board be skipped because of the lack of alert of 1S. I disagree with that. I have personally and observed many times that people ask and receive undoes after 1,2,3 and sometimes 4 bids were made after their so called misclick. If that player felt that he had missed on something because of the lack of alert, he could have asked for the auction to revert to him right after the 1S response. By the way, I saw it done in ACBL live tourneys. You may argue, sure, but then let's argue on the misuse of the so called misclicks too

hi,


as told earlier, sayc is maybe fairly know but defenatly not a good reason to make as standard what shoud be alerted or not, many times i explained other system players to alert their bids if their is a convention/agreement what a bid means.

almost Nobody these days seems to alert 2C 2D/transfers over nt.U trie to explain to a beginner in the middle of a tourney what trsfers are and when they are used.

Agreement with partner/special meaning, alert it and explain, maybe attract some new players to this game and make it easy/easier for them to get started.

Agree with the "undo" till that bid, i always have undos off in my tournaments till something similar happens, go back to the bid and other side can bid with full info.

But mostey we deal with players out to have afree lunch, countless are the players saying they just wanted a adjust and no going back to that bid and start all over without the "damage" they claim to suffer. Not sure claus and gerard arwe talking about the same bids. 1♣2♣ and ♣1♥??

we agree that the 2♣isnt passeble for partner,so alert.i woudnt make a big fuss about it in my tourneys, just saying to players to alert and explain when asked.

marc

[the hog]

Gerard, perhaps you would like to point me to the regulation where it says that anything not sayc should be alerted, and perhaps also where it says "This is the fundamental bidding system that BBO has adopted for all players, no matter where they reside in the world." I seem to have missed both of those pieces of wisdom in my perusal of the site.

[csdenmark]

Marc Gerard and I talk about the same - we were partners. 1♥♠/2♣♦ has all same meaning in Precision as response to 1♣ open: 5+cd,8+HcP,game force.

I normally try to provide decent information. I load convention card and alert these for Precision:

1♣ = 16+,any

1NT = 13-15

2♣=11-15, good 6cd or 5+cd + a SUIT

2♦=11-15, 3415, 4305, 4414, D=short

2♥♠=8-10HcP, good 6-carder

3♣=9-13, good 6-7cd, stop outside

3♦=9-12, 7+cd solid, any suit

3♥♠=6-7 tricks

4♣♦=10-14, solid MAJOR(C=H,D=S)

The problem was a complaint to a Yellow who accepted the complaint and forwarded it to me. This caused much discussion at the table about the topic incl. a suggestion to have those rules, I see them as horrible, incorporated in "Rules for these sites". If so - then it will in future be a topic to be reported for misconduct to Uday with sanctions. Can we live with such?

[helene_t]

What is the general rule anyway? Does it say "anything that the opps might misinterpret", "anything that differs from SAYC", "anything that is non-natural" or "whenever in doubt, alert"? I certainly hope it is not a mixture of all four, since this would make it impossible to say what to do in case one principle contradicts another principle.

"Anything that the opps might misinterpret" might work well when playing relaxed against familiar opps, but it is not something a TD can enforce.

"Anything that differs from SAYC" is clear as long as all 4 players agree as to the exact meaning of the word "SAYC".

"Anything that is non-natural" seems ideal to me, but it is very different from what we are used to when playing F2F, so it will take a long time before everybody acknowdge this rule.

[Mirjam_3]

sure Helene, no choice is easy...
i chose for my tournaments for yr last possibility (players must alert and explain all non natural bids) and so far i have had 2 times a problem with it and i see some problems with it but somehow it never was a problem so far in the tournaments so i left it in peace, hehe.

with me you have to alert all non natural bids and once a player asked me why i didnt use ACBL and he really had some arguments before it. I decided to stick to the non natural since i have lots of European players - maybe due to the time of my day, i am in Europe also - and not all know those rules.

secondly i had a player who refused to alert his 2c opening which was strong and since it is not natural he had to alert it in my tournament and certainly i felt for his point of view. He was stating he was no beginner and indeed he was all except that. But i pointed out i have all kind of players in my tournaments.. also beginners. He said something like he cdnot accept that all played there stupidly. And if i recall correctly i blacklisted him for sometime and after that i made him blue again and i dont remember his name but i remember he played again in Glamour and we had no problem again.

Than i myself see some problems, but as i pointed out they were not a problem.. well maybe after this post

In Holland we use dutch acol and that is a 4 c major bidding system. lots play it w 5-5 in majors and than you have to alert the 1c bid in ftf bridge since it can be a 2 card.

In sayc 5-5 major is standard and i dont see it ever alerted if they open 1c. I am now this far that if i play dutch acol w 5-5 majors on the net i dont alert the 1c opening myself but if i was strict i wd have to alert it... and i still think i sd... I stopped doing it since i got soooo many questions about this alert and not all understood my point.. to say the least.
Somehow there is an unwritten rule that 1c can be a 2 card and even players who are not familiar with sayc never comment on the non-alerted 1c with 2 clubs... I am sure if they did they got me...!!

Further the range of NT goes as in sayc not alerted and there i never had a problem also. All seem to think it is standard 15-17 and it has to be alerted otherwise... I thought about it to take the NT-range in my rules but i found out there was no need for.

My conclusion is that this non-natural system works best for the players i have in the tournaments. Maybe not perfect... but..

Further all alert their transfers... and if they dont i can convince them they sd.

Maybe it is not perfect but it is the most simple thing to rule....and i am simple

[hrothgar]

Shrike, on May 11 2004, 07:38 AM, said:

Hog, you're right that the 2C bid is natural. You're also right that anyone who has played against a strong club will know what it means. And you're right that the opponents were probably fussing over nothing, even if it's technically an alertable bid -- they probably knew, and even if not were probably not damaged.

However. . . some people have not played against precision. If the opps were new, they are entitled to an alert of a sequence that to them probably (depending on what they're familiar with, I know, but let's guess it's not precision) sounded weaker than a GF. An alert seems not only potentially helpful, but appropriate; I think it should be required.

Under ACBL rules, in case that's what the opps thought applied (wrongly, if so), the bid is definitely alertable, as are all other responses to a precison club. Reason: though natural (they show length and/or strength in the suit bid), they are of a strength that is "highly unusual or unexpected." I know, it's not unexpected to a non-novice in the context of a strong club opening, provided the opps are familiar with such auctions, but that's not how it's decided.

As most people know, I have some issues with the ACBL and the way they handle most everything in life. With this said and done, there are a few areas where they have done the "right" thing. One of those being the following:

The ACBL states directly that players are expected to familiarize themselves with the basics of "standard" systems. In short, there is an expectation that players do a minimal amount of actual "work". Unfortunately, their are all too many people who seem to believe that they have a right to top boards simply for showing up. These same individuals seem particularly prone to try to get the director to award them what they are unable to achieve at the table...

Quite frankly, my reaction to a director call regarding an auction like 1C* - (P) - 2C in a Precision system would be to try to educate the players who were complaining. If they griped at all, part of that educate would be a proceedural penalty for wasting my time...

[Free]

The_Hog, on May 11 2004, 01:15 PM, said:

Marc,
Claus is right. If you are playing Precision a positive is a GF, and if not alerted is natural. Anyone who has been playing for a month knows this. 2C hardly needs to be alerted and it is hardly a "special" meaning for you and your partner".

What about those who don't alert Stayman or transfers? Is this also a "special treatment for you and your partner"? If you want pre alerts for this then pre alert "1C - 1H to 7NT is a game force". Pretty silly, huh!

Going by your own comment a couple of posts earlier - "i still think that every conventionel bid shoud be alerted to make no misunderstanding"
Claus' 2C bid here is NOT a conventional bid. This is just another example of someone kicking up a fuss because Claus is not playing the same system as they are. In fact I would fine the complainants.

I don't agree with you Ron! It's not because it's a 'normal' bid in precision that it shouldn't be alerted to anyone who might not know the system. For example, I know a few strong ♣ systems and they all have different response schemes. Perhaps the standard precision is 8+HCP and 5+ card, but I'm not supposed to know that, since I'm not the one playing that system. So I don't see ANY reason why not to alert, since the bid has some 'extra' information for you that any opponent can not know.

If you'd draw the line further the way you'd (not) alert, you shouldn't even alert the 1♣ opening, since it's normal in precision that it's 16+, you shouldn't alert the 1♦ opening, since it's a normal bid in precision,... Get the picture? It has nothing to do with a special meaning for PARTNER, it's about a special meaning to OPPONENTS.

[hrothgar]

I've said it before, I'll say it again:

Alert structures are dreadful mechanisms to disclose methods.
An alert can take one of two "states". A bid is either alertable or un-alertable.
By definition, the alert structure is able to carry a single "bit" of information. Normally, regulators use this bit to denote whether a bid is "standard" or non-standard. In some cases, the bit is used to explain whether the bid is artifical or conventional. Some idiots suggest that the alert to denote either (unusual or conventional), creating a situation in which all bids are alerted and alerts have no value what-so-ever.

However, what should be clear is that the alert structure does not and CAN NOT provide sufficient information for the opponents. Rather than obsessing over alerts, its probably more useful to consider how a combination of convention cards and announcements can be used to provide adequate disclosure...

[helene_t]

Mirjam: 1♣ on a doubleton is alertable. In SAYC, 1♦ can be a 3-card, which is not alertable, not even in the Netherlands. So Dutch and American alert rules are the same in this respect.