Welcome to Hell - Take a number

[Fluffy]

yeah good, so if I ask I give UI, but if I don't ask I give UI as well because I might ask with a good hand this is nuts. Much better to just ask regardless

[cherdanno]

yeah good, so if I ask I give UI, but if I don't ask I give UI as well because I might ask with a good hand this is nuts. Much better to just ask regardless

I have never asked opponents about an unalerted 4♠ opening. Have you?

[gnasher]

Much much better is to have the opponents' convention card face-up in front of you, so that there's no need to ask anyway.

[gnasher]

I have never asked opponents about an unalerted 4♠ opening. Have you?

You wouldn't have to in the ACBL, because it would be alertable if they played Namyats. On the other hand, you have a mandatory 10-second pause to fill up, so you could use part of that to ask about it anyway.

[hanp]

yeah good, so if I ask I give UI, but if I don't ask I give UI as well because I might ask with a good hand this is nuts. Much better to just ask regardless

But which bids will you ask about? Any bid?

 

Come on, if your partner asks about a 4H opening, then thinks for a while and finally decides to pass, you know he was thinking about doing something. What can be more UI than that?

[peachy]

Much much better is to have the opponents' convention card face-up in front of you, so that there's no need to ask anyway.

Yes. But this was in the ACBL. Everybody in this forum knows that that isn't happening here unless a foreigner tries to go by that rule. And I really mean "tries"; he may have to force the card from under the opponent's buttocks...

 

Secondly, if you have a suspicion that a failure to alert has occurred [exactly what happened here], the ACBL regulation says you should inquire rather than claim damage from MI afterward when you could have protected yourself by asking. I don't know how Phil was able to gauge that they might have had Namyats on the card, but it does not matter IMO.

 

Anyway, things are not the same in EBU and ACBL.

[keylime]

This is a tough decision here. If pard finds a dbl, I am certainly not defending 4SX with this hand, but I'd have to really wonder about partner, and myself (I bid 5C now, I'm 4th seat, bound to go plus).

 

With Larry at least, he'd OPEN more often than not to save me from this plight.

[the hog]

But that's the point, isn't it? Who says I am more likely to ask with a good hand?

Do you routinely ask this question when you aren't thinking of bidding?

Actually, yes.

[awm]

The situation with alerts and asking about bids is really pretty untenable. In this case it seems like:

 

(1) If the 4♠ call had been alerted, then if you ask it conveys UI (you have a decent hand) and if you don't ask that also conveys UI (you have a lousy hand). Among other things this totally contravenes the purpose of the stop card, since partner always knows whether you have a good hand or a bad hand, and is thus under ethical constraints.

 

(2) When the 4♠ call was not alerted, there would never be any protection for a possible "failure to alert" because ACBL requires that experienced players protect themselves in situations where an alert is common/possible by asking. Thus if you care whether they play namyats you have to ask about the 4♠ call (you cannot just assume that 4♠ would've been alerted if they played the convention).

 

(3) Now partner has UI from the choice to ask/not ask about even an unalerted bid. Presumably if Phil had not asked and just passed in his normal (post skip-bid tempo) and then partner had chosen not to balance with a marginal hand (taking advantage of Phil's non-ask) there would be no adjustment... but I don't see why not.

 

In fact there is a general issue that when the UI says "bid, don't pass" and we choose to bid there is often an adjustment.... but when the UI says "pass, don't bid" and we choose to pass the laws are rarely enforced with such diligence. I can't ever recall seeing a case where a player passed a hand out, then had the board adjusted (basically forcing a marginal balancing call) due to UI from partner's evident disinterest in acting.

[pretzalz]

I don't understand why 4♠ would need to be alerted playing namyats. I open 4♦ on hands I would otherwise open 1♠, not 4♠. The range of hands I open 4♠ is pretty much the same whether or not I'm playing namyats. In third seat I need a borderline 2♣ opener to open 4♦ so from that perspective the question is particularly bizarre.

[aguahombre]

I don't understand why 4♠ would need to be alerted playing namyats.

Maybe you don't have to alert it in your jurisdiction. In ACBL, it should be alerted because it is part of a system (Namyats), where it is the weaker of two ways of showing a hand with a long spade suit which wants to open at the 4-level. The inference from not choosing the 4D bid is something to disclose.

 

Since in certain cases YOUR 4S and 4D openings are stronger than the standards for NAMYATS, if you are in ACBL your partner should make that clear in the explanation.

[the hog]

I don't understand why 4♠ would need to be alerted playing namyats.

Maybe you don't have to alert it in your jurisdiction. In ACBL, it should be alerted because it is part of a system (Namyats), where it is the weaker of two ways of showing a hand with a long spade suit which wants to open at the 4-level. The inference from not choosing the 4D bid is something to disclose.

 

Since in certain cases YOUR 4S and 4D openings are stronger than the standards for NAMYATS, if you are in ACBL your partner should make that clear in the explanation.

Do people actually alert it though, I mean in reality?

[jdonn]

I don't believe opening 4♠ when playing namyats is alertable in the ACBL. It shows the exact same as a 4♠ opening bid for people who don't play namyats. It's the 4♦ opening bid that shows a hand too strong for a standard 4♠ opening where people who don't play namyats have to try 1♠ instead.

[peachy]

I don't understand why 4♠ would need to be alerted playing namyats. I open 4♦ on hands I would otherwise open 1♠, not 4♠. The range of hands I open 4♠ is pretty much the same whether or not I'm playing namyats. In third seat I need a borderline 2♣ opener to open 4♦ so from that perspective the question is particularly bizarre.

Nothing bizarre about it. In an earlier post, I quoted the relevant part of the ACBL regulation but here it is again:

 

" Natural opening bids at the three level or higher which convey an unusual message regarding HCP range or any other information which might be unexpected to the opponents must be Alerted.

EXAMPLE: 4H,S openings which are natural but are weaker than might be expected because the partnership has some other method (an example is the Namyats convention) for showing a good 4H,S opening. "