[Fluffy]

---

MPs, East Alerts 2NT by tapping on the table.

The play by south is kinda bad, ♣K lead, club to the ♣A, diamond back and declarer thinks but plays low to ♦Q, ♣Q, East pitchig a diamond, diamond ruff, heart, and declarer manages to misscount trumps and lose another diamond ruff for down 3.

North asks south why did you make that diamond finesse, don't you know what 2NT is?

Yes south says, 20-21.

No he alerted.

I didn't see any alert.


So north calls director and says that one of the reasons why South made the diamond finesse is that East didn't alert properly the 2NT bid.

South is a beginner, north argues that counting to 40 is beyond his current level.

[barmar]

What are the alerting regulations in the jurisdiction where this was played? Is tapping the table a correct way to alert there?

Also, is Unusual 2NT not taught to beginners there? Here in the US it's not alertable.

[hrothgar]

Fluffy, on 2015-October-24, 15:36, said:

---

South is a beginner, north argues that counting to 40 is beyond his current level.

At the end of the day, bridge is a game of skill.
It seems strange to reward people for being incompetent.

BTW, if West really has something approximating 20-21 HCPs, it would seem even MORE likely that he holds the Queen of Diamonds.
South's line of play is nonsensical.

South needs to take their bruises. Hopefully this will encourage them to improve their game.

[Fluffy]

barmar, on 2015-October-24, 15:51, said:

What are the alerting regulations in the jurisdiction where this was played? Is tapping the table a correct way to alert there?

No specific regulation on this, so I guess it is not correct. However many bidding boxes lack alert card so it is not unnusual.

barmar, on 2015-October-24, 15:51, said:

Also, is Unusual 2NT not taught to beginners there? Here in the US it's not alertable.

Not in the list of standard conventions.

[blackshoe]

It seems to me that it should be incumbent on an alerting playing to make sure his opponents are aware of the alert, even if that principle is not enshrined in the regulation (which it is in the ACBL).

[Vampyr]

blackshoe, on 2015-October-24, 20:44, said:

It seems to me that it should be incumbent on an alerting playing to make sure his opponents are aware of the alert, even if that principle is not enshrined in the regulation (which it is in the ACBL).

As it is in the EBU.

It is a little hard to imagine a jurisdiction not having any regulations on how an alert is made; they should, if nothing else, default to their NBO's regulation. And if this regulation involves the use of the alert card, then venues with bidding boxes containing no alert cards should correct that deficiency forthwith.

[Fluffy]

hrothgar, on 2015-October-24, 15:57, said:

At the end of the day, bridge is a game of skill.
It seems strange to reward people for being incompetent.

BTW, if West really has something approximating 20-21 HCPs, it would seem even MORE likely that he holds the Queen of Diamonds.
South's line of play is nonsensical.

South needs to take their bruises. Hopefully this will encourage them to improve their game.

While I agree with you on most it might be worth noting that a losing finesse against a balanced hand probably changes nothing, While a losing finesse against a 2 suiter loses a trick overall inmediatelly.

[gordontd]

hrothgar, on 2015-October-24, 15:57, said:

It seems strange to reward people for being incompetent.

It seems strange to reward people for failing to disclose their agreements properly.

[lamford]

gordontd, on 2015-October-25, 02:57, said:

It seems strange to reward people for failing to disclose their agreements properly.

I agree, and against beginners it is even more important to make sure they understand. If there is no alert card in the bidding box, East could say Alerta, or whatever they say in Spain. I would rule down 2, as declarer has eight tricks, but miscounted trumps after the infraction, so that trick lost was SEWoG. If the jurisdiction allows it, then it would be down 2 for NS and down 1 for EW.

[hrothgar]

gordontd, on 2015-October-25, 02:57, said:

It seems strange to reward people for failing to disclose their agreements properly.

We don't know whether this is true.

I have played in plenty of venues where tapping the alert flag is preferred and far more where 2NT isn't alertable.

[gordontd]

hrothgar, on 2015-October-25, 03:25, said:

We don't know whether this is true.

I have played in plenty of venues where tapping the alert flag is preferred and far more where 2NT isn't alertable.

From the information in this thread, I don't think either of these things apply here.

[barmar]

Fluffy, on 2015-October-24, 15:36, said:

South is a beginner, north argues that counting to 40 is beyond his current level.

This seems like a real stretch, IMHO.

[Trinidad]

hrothgar, on 2015-October-25, 03:25, said:

We don't know whether this is true.

I have played in plenty of venues where tapping the alert flag is preferred and far more where 2NT isn't alertable.

And I have played in plenty of sessions where the first prize was a ham... which is just as relevant.

Let's just consider it a fact (since Fluffy says so) that in Spain:
- an unusual 2NT is alertable
- tapping the table is probably not the correct alert procedure

And FWIW, I doubt that they even have an alert flag in Spain. (It wouldn't surprise me at all if Fluffy, despite his experience, doesn't even know what an alert flag is.)

Rik

[billw55]

Assuming that 1) 2NT is in fact alertable, and 2) that the method used to alert is not sanctioned, then yes, there was an infraction - improper alert.

However, there was no damage that resulted from the infraction. Declarer is obviously not capable of using any inference from the bidding in his play. So north's argument does not hold water. Furthermore, the mere fact that north had to make the argument on south's behalf weighs against it.

No adjustment. Warning to east. Useful lesson for south. Next hand.