Hi, A disagreement as regards interpretation of an EBU alerting regulation between two people who should be agreeing. Thoughts please ... N E S W 1S 2C X P 3N All Pass The double "showed values" but promises clubs (do not know how many but is not restricted to a particular number either). View a) The x is simply a mechanism for ensuring that N bids. Although it does promise the suit bid, it is "ostensibly" for t/o although partner can convert it. It is thus not alterable. It is not specifically intended for penalties View b) This is not a t/o x because it promises clubs and thus i) partner has information that the opponents are unlikely to expect about the shape of the hand (if not alerted) and ii) N can pass it knowing safely that S has clubs and also values (certainly with apppropriate vulnerability). This more as an optionable double than a take out double and thus it is alertable. A similar scenario as well .... 1S X This double shows any shape, it does not deny Spades and indeed the person doing the double can have a 4+ cd spade suit. All it states is that "I have an opening hand". I also think that this is alertable as it is again more of an optionable double than specificallly for take out. Others disagree. In an actual event the bidding went 1C X and the doubler had a 6 cd club suit and an opening hand. Although an extreme (but real) example, to my mind, this is why it is alertable surely ? Views are appreciated - thank you. Regards, Bugbear
