International Bridge Laws Forum

Welcome, Register :: Log in

View Thread Page(s): [ 1 ]

[ Get Email Advice of Replies ]

[ Print ]

[ Send ]

[ Watch ]

[ < ] [ Add a Reply ] [ > ]

Guest Reply

mandatory alert or not? ( 18:48:57 WedJul 2 2003 ) Select Action Reply Quote post Report post Last posts Whisper Country: usa Would like to know if 1S following partner's opening 1H (playing Flannery) is alertable under ACBL rules?

Ed 172 posts Forum Host Reply

Re: mandatory alert or not? ( 03:18:18 ThuJul 3 2003 ) Select Action Reply Quote post Report post Last posts Ignore user Global ignore Whisper Country: USA Nope. This specific sequence is an example in Part I of the alert procedure, and it is not alertable. Er, that is, assuming 1 is natural, even if it's 5+ cards.

Guest Reply

Re: mandatory alert or not? ( 07:42:09 ThuJul 3 2003 ) Select Action Reply Quote post Report post Last posts Whisper Country: Aust Hi Ed, this seems curious to me. In my part of the world, I would feel it incumbent to alert 1S because I know that it is 5+, something my opps may not know. Obviously this is not the case in America? We alert whenever we have information the opps do not necessarily have.

bluejak 427 posts Forum Host Reply

Re: mandatory alert or not? ( 17:16:58 ThuJul 3 2003 ) Select Action Reply Quote post Report post Last posts Ignore user Global ignore Whisper Alerting is very different in different countries, and up to a point none of it works perfectly. Australian alerting is based very much on commonsense - and that always leads to differences of opinion. American alerting is much more based on laid-down rules - and that always leads to problems over what players see as exceptions. While it sounds easy to alert what your opponents do not expect the trouble is always that players have different expectations! Incidentally, thanks to Ed for his reply that 1 - 1 showing 5 cards is not alertable in the ACBL. That is how I read the ACBL rules, but confirmation helps. --- David Stevenson <laws2@blakjak.com> Liverpool, England, UK http://blakjak.com/lws_menu.htm

ne_trepide Reply

Re: mandatory alert or not? ( 09:41:26 SatJul 5 2003 ) Select Action Reply Quote post Report post Last posts Whisper australia i don't know where "guest" could have obtained the notion that an overcall of 1S over a 1H opening is alertable because it is a 5+ card suit, but he/she is completely in error. it is essential that an overcall be alerted if the opponents have an agreement to overcall with a 4 card suit under these conditions but a 5 card suit is recognised as a natural suit overcall and alerting such an overcall is silly. overcalling with a 5 card suit is the accepted standard play and deviations from the standard require alerting.

bluejak 427 posts Forum Host Reply

Re: mandatory alert or not? ( 22:13:23 SatJul 5 2003 ) Select Action Reply Quote post Report post Last posts Ignore user Global ignore Whisper This thread is about a response of 1 showing 5 cards, not an overcall. --- David Stevenson <laws2@blakjak.com> Liverpool, England, UK http://blakjak.com/lws_menu.htm

mycroft 67 posts bridgetalk member Reply

Re: mandatory alert or not? ( 21:27:14 MonJul 7 2003 ) Select Action Reply Quote post Report post Last posts Ignore user Global ignore Whisper The ACBL Alert Chart says: Quote: In general, when the use of conventions leads to unexpected understandings about suit length by negative inference, a natural call becomes Alertable. Some such agreements have become expected and are fairly common, therefore no Alert is required. Flannery is such a common convention over here - especially in Calgary, where "with or without Flannery" seems to be the first query in *pickup* discussions, and most people are upset when I say "without" - that it is the first "people will expect it" example on the ACBL Alert Chart, even before 1H-1NT(forcing); 2m on 3 cards (or 2C on 4522) min. So, as everyone has said, in ACBL-land, 1H-1S promising 5 is not alertable, nor is 1H-1NT concealing a 4-card spade suit. This happens to be one of my "uncomfort zones" with the Alert chart, because while it is very common, the trigger for the information isn't in the auction, but in a totally different call, so it could very easily be a "surprise", especially if (as is very common here, grumble) there are no CCs on the table. But I don't decide the system, I just rule on and teach it. Michael. [1 edits; Last edit by mycroft at 21:28:17 Mon Jul 7 2003]

bluejak 427 posts Forum Host Reply

Re: mandatory alert or not? ( 00:29:30 TueJul 8 2003 ) Select Action Reply Quote post Report post Last posts Ignore user Global ignore Whisper Marvin French has made quite a study of ACBL alerting, and agrees 1 - 1 showing five cards is not alertable. But he is not happy about it!!! He plays in the San Diego area: there, so he says, Flannery is very rare, so this sequence will come as a total surprise to people. --- David Stevenson <laws2@blakjak.com> Liverpool, England, UK http://blakjak.com/lws_menu.htm

ne_trepide Reply

Re: mandatory alert or not? ( 10:02:07 ThuJul 10 2003 ) Select Action Reply Quote post Report post Last posts Whisper australia sorry the only idiot here is myself indeed partners response showing a 5 card suit is indeed alertable as outlined. i unreservedly apologise to guest.

View Thread Page(s): [ 1 ]

[ Get Email Advice of Replies ]

[ Print ]

[ Send ]

[ Watch ]

[ < ] [ Add a Reply ] [ > ]

6 bridge player(s) online in the last 15 minutes - 1 bridgetalk member(s), 0 incognito and 5 guest(s). (The most ever was 52 09:45:43 Fri Feb 14 2003) bluejak

Total Members: 393, Newest Member: edm.

Register :: Log in The time is now 00:27:23 Wed Aug 27 2003

top

Thread Index :: FAQ's :: Main Menu :: Posting Hints :: Emoticon Key :: Search David's Lawspage :: EBU :: ACBL :: WBF

Legend :: Read Topic :: Unread Topic

Help | Full Format: ON :: OFF | Text: ON :: OFF | Email Status