[Fluffy]

I have a partner who is incapable of learning conventions, he is alo incapable of winning a trump contract but that's another story.

Right now we have 5 conventions:

-first bid = double asks for suit
-stayman
-transfer (only to majors)
-regular blackwood
-2♣ opening is strong.



This means that he will bid things like:

4th suit naturally
Raise 1♠ to 4♠ with 16 HCP
overcall a 5 card 1♥ opening with 2♥ when he has hearts.

[mgoetze]

Sorry, I don't know the Spanish alert regulations.

[ArtK78]

Without knowing the details of the alert structure that you are dealing with, it seems right to alert bids that a great majority of players play as conventional if your partnership plays them as natural, i.e., a natural meaning of the bid would not be expected.

Sort of like a penalty double of an opening bid in direct seat. No one would expect a direct double to be for penalties.

[Fluffy]

ArtK78, on 2012-June-05, 14:52, said:

Sort of like a penalty double of an opening bid in direct seat. No one would expect a direct double to be for penalties.

yes, but, alerting 4SF or michael's is required, so when don't you alert?

[squealydan]

Fluffy, on 2012-June-05, 14:59, said:

yes, but, alerting 4SF or michael's is required, so when don't you alert?

This is an area which leaves me a bit confused at times as well - when you play a conventional bid which is different to what the rest of the room is playing, but which is also alertable in "standard" bridge.

At the club where I usually I play Jacoby 2NT is fairly unusual, but most people recognise it and know the standard follow-ups. So if our auction begins 1H-2NT-3C, we alert the last two bids.

Most opponents expect the 3C bid to show shortage in clubs, when in fact we use it to show a minimum opening hand.

Many opponents won't ask about the alert, and if responder simply bids 4H over that and the auction ends, is declarer obliged to now re-alert the alert or something to make sure the opponents know what the bid showed? We do play with complete system cards but at one-or-two boards per table matchpoint events, opponents rarely bother to look at them.

[mgoetze]

squealydan, on 2012-June-05, 16:53, said:

Many opponents won't ask about the alert, and if responder simply bids 4H over that and the auction ends, is declarer obliged to now re-alert the alert or something to make sure the opponents know what the bid showed?

Nope. If you alerted the bid and your opponents didn't care, it's 100% their problem. Even if it's because the alert regulations are bonkers. (Example of the latter case: in Germany 2♥ as a weak 2 in hearts is alertable. I once became declarer one the auction 2♥-p-p-p, my partner having alerted because 2♥ showed 4-4 or better in the majors. Opponents never thought to ask.)

[trevahound]

squealydan, on 2012-June-05, 16:53, said:

This is an area which leaves me a bit confused at times as well - when you play a conventional bid which is different to what the rest of the room is playing, but which is also alertable in "standard" bridge.

At the club where I usually I play Jacoby 2NT is fairly unusual, but most people recognise it and know the standard follow-ups. So if our auction begins 1H-2NT-3C, we alert the last two bids.

Most opponents expect the 3C bid to show shortage in clubs, when in fact we use it to show a minimum opening hand.

Many opponents won't ask about the alert, and if responder simply bids 4H over that and the auction ends, is declarer obliged to now re-alert the alert or something to make sure the opponents know what the bid showed? We do play with complete system cards but at one-or-two boards per table matchpoint events, opponents rarely bother to look at them.

I have many similar examples I wonder about. For example, for us 1♠ - 2nt (alert) - 3♥ (alert) would rarely get an ask, most assuming it's heart shortness, where for us it's significant extras + club shortness. I want to say "special alert", but of course am not able to. After the auction, at the time we'd disclose delayed alerts, assuming we've overbid and bought it, I tell the opps that some of the alertable calls probably don't mean what they think they mean, so they might want to ask.

Particularly amusing to me are our 1♥ - 2nt (no alert) auctions, and our 1m - 2m (no alert) auctions. It would save time if I just alerted them as natural and forcing (in the first case) and as a simple raise, NF (in the second case), as there is nearly always an ask about what the opps are sure is a missed alert.

[blackshoe]

You can, as the declaring side, offer an explanation of the auction before the opening lead is chosen in situations like this. In most jurisdictions (all, in fact, as far as I know), though, you are not required to do so.

[Zelandakh]

mgoetze, on 2012-June-05, 17:01, said:

(Example of the latter case: in Germany 2♥ as a weak 2 in hearts is alertable. I once became declarer one the auction 2♥-p-p-p, my partner having alerted because 2♥ showed 4-4 or better in the majors. Opponents never thought to ask.)

I have better examples from Germany. My partner and I play Rubensohl (transfers) after a 1NT opening and overcall. Noone has yet asked the meaning of such a bid. Another classic example from Germany is the auction 1NT - (X) - XX, which is never allowed to be alerted. Naturally this is part of a runout system over our weak NT but since almost everyone round here plays strong I would suspect most have never even considered the possibility. Certainly noone has ever asked, even the times when I (wrongly) alerted it.

[mgoetze]

Zelandakh, on 2012-June-06, 05:21, said:

I have better examples from Germany. My partner and I play Rubensohl (transfers) after a 1NT opening and overcall. Noone has yet asked the meaning of such a bid. Another classic example from Germany is the auction 1NT - (X) - XX, which is never allowed to be alerted. Naturally this is part of a runout system over our weak NT but since almost everyone round here plays strong I would suspect most have never even considered the possibility. Certainly noone has ever asked, even the times when I (wrongly) alerted it.

The example I gave was from a very low-level event (notwithstanding the fact it awarded quintuple masterpoints). I'm sure if you ever bothered to attend a serious bridge event here in Germany you would be surprised how many things people ask about.

[barmar]

At one time ACBL tried an alerting mechanism that was intended to deal with this problem. If you played an unusual convention that made use of a bid that was already alertable because of a common convention, you said "special alert" instead of just "alert". It wasn't very popular, maybe because players weren't sure when they were supposed to use it. It was scrapped and replaced with the announcement system. It doesn't help with all cases, though, e.g. the variation on Jacoby followups described above.

[jh51]

Regarding the "Jacoby 2NT" variation of responses, is it really still Jacoby if you are not playing standard responses? Or is it simply an artificial game forcing 2NT? If the oppoenents were to ask, might it be better to explain it that way, mentioning that the responses are not the standard Jacoby responses?

Of course, if they don't bother to ask, assuming they already know, that's their problem.

[barmar]

jh51, on 2012-June-06, 14:01, said:

Regarding the "Jacoby 2NT" variation of responses, is it really still Jacoby if you are not playing standard responses? Or is it simply an artificial game forcing 2NT? If the oppoenents were to ask, might it be better to explain it that way, mentioning that the responses are not the standard Jacoby responses?

Even if you ARE playing standard Jacoby, you should still explain it as an artificial game forcing raise. I think most jurisdictions say that simply giving the name of a convention is not a sufficient explanation.

But in the above stories, it sounded like the opponents didn't ask about either 2NT or the followup.

[bluejak]

In England a natural 2♥ over 1♥ or a natural fourth suit bid is not alertable. While most people alert Michaels routinely, and a lot of people [though not so many as Michaels] alert 4SF, I do wonder whether opponents would assume Michaels or 4SF if you do not alert.

[Fluffy]

One problem that arises here, is that rules sometimes talk about level of players, but they seem to assume the partnerships are equal. My partner would never alert any of this bids because he would never take them as unnusual (not that I plan on bidding 2M over 1M anyway actually), so if I alert them it becomes imbalanced alert system.

Nobody would persue an adjustement if 2 beginners bid this natural way and didn't alert I think, so maybe my partnership shouldn't be different than that.