helene_t Posted October 15, 2008 Report Share Posted October 15, 2008 It's a shame that the Laws of Bridge have delegated to local Regulating Authorities the power to determine what needs to be alerted. Surely uniformity on this would be best for everyone. I think it would be useful if WBF made some default alert rules for use in international competition. Then SO's can adopt those rules if they want. I am against forcing SOs to uniformity. The Ducth BF decided to make Jacoby transfers non-alertable, makes some sense in a country where more than 99% of club players play them but may make less sense elsewhere. In the Netherlands, a strong 1NT opening is not alertable but a weak one is. Again, makes some sense in the Netherlands but would be absurd in many places. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrdct Posted October 15, 2008 Report Share Posted October 15, 2008 It's a shame that the Laws of Bridge have delegated to local Regulating Authorities the power to determine what needs to be alerted. Surely uniformity on this would be best for everyone. I think that there are more positive aspects to that delegation than negativeLike what? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwikjanz Posted October 15, 2008 Report Share Posted October 15, 2008 Whilst in favour of our current regs (New Zealand, Australia) for tournament players. and definitely in favour of uniform regs for high level tournament events, I would have to ask where our local (majority) player is left? Either we promulgate two sets of regulations - Tournaments- lets all adopt the WBF standard, that's fine - but tournament style regulations and expectations create confusion with little old ladies and other ordinary club players, not to mention putting off players who are new to the game. Or do we set rules and regulations that encourage people to play and enjoy the game and to progress with easy rules and regulations and therefore set alerts at a low level and comply with the Laws defining reasonable expectation and complying with the spirit of the laws. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulg Posted October 15, 2008 Report Share Posted October 15, 2008 It's a shame that the Laws of Bridge have delegated to local Regulating Authorities the power to determine what needs to be alerted. Surely uniformity on this would be best for everyone. I think that there are more positive aspects to that delegation than negativeLike what?Well, we like alerting Stayman in Scotland and you'd all take this away from us. More seriously, there is a philosophical difference between countries on the purpose of the Alerting Regulations. The ACBL focuses more on tournament players, and so conventions in regular tournament use are not alertable (such as, unusual 2NT, cue bids, Stayman). In England the focus is more the club player. In Scotland we go with the WBF rules so, I guess, slightly more interested in the experienced player. Paul Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdano Posted October 15, 2008 Report Share Posted October 15, 2008 It's a shame that the Laws of Bridge have delegated to local Regulating Authorities the power to determine what needs to be alerted. Surely uniformity on this would be best for everyone. I think that there are more positive aspects to that delegation than negativeLike what? Are you seriously asking this question?? Don't you think it is an advantage that you don't have to alert Polish club playing in a Polish club? Otherwise, everyone would alert their 1♣ opening. If there is actually a pair playing precision, opponents would completely miss out on that fact. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skjaeran Posted October 15, 2008 Report Share Posted October 15, 2008 It's a shame that the Laws of Bridge have delegated to local Regulating Authorities the power to determine what needs to be alerted. Surely uniformity on this would be best for everyone. I think it would be useful if WBF made some default alert rules for use in international competition. Then SO's can adopt those rules if they want. I am against forcing SOs to uniformity. The Ducth BF decided to make Jacoby transfers non-alertable, makes some sense in a country where more than 99% of club players play them but may make less sense elsewhere. In the Netherlands, a strong 1NT opening is not alertable but a weak one is. Again, makes some sense in the Netherlands but would be absurd in many places. What do you mean would be useful? The WBF did just that ages ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted October 15, 2008 Report Share Posted October 15, 2008 thanks Harald, wasnt aware of that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.