blackshoe Posted April 6, 2012 Report Share Posted April 6, 2012 No. Or maybe. An alert has two parts: the waving around of the alert card (or tapping the alert strip, if you can find it) and the statement "alert!". An announcement also has two parts, the first of which just happens to be identical to the first part of the alert procedure. I've said before that I think an announcement is a kind of alert, but most folks pooh-pooh the idea. Of course, as you say, most people ignore that first part in both cases anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pran Posted April 6, 2012 Report Share Posted April 6, 2012 No. Or maybe. An alert has two parts: the waving around of the alert card (or tapping the alert strip, if you can find it) and the statement "alert!". An announcement also has two parts, the first of which just happens to be identical to the first part of the alert procedure. I've said before that I think an announcement is a kind of alert, but most folks pooh-pooh the idea. Of course, as you say, most people ignore that first part in both cases anyway.Although kind of splitting hairs I would say that (at least according to our Norwegian regulations) Alert has two parts: 1 - signalling the alert, and 2 - answering any question related to the alert signal. Announcing has only one part: Immediately giving the relevant information to opponents without awaiting any kind of question. Other jurisdictions may have (and apparently do have) different regulations with different consequences. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted April 6, 2012 Report Share Posted April 6, 2012 (edited) Regarding the original (EBU) question, I found this in the minutes of an L&EC meeting, July 2010: It was also confirmed that the prescribed announcements in the Orange Book may be added to by players if doing so aids full disclosure in a concise fashion.That seems clear enough, though it would have been even clearer if they'd actually changed the regulations instead of expecting people to read the minutes and remember them years later. We don't have to copy the WBFLC in all things, do we? Edited April 6, 2012 by gnasher 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremy69A Posted April 6, 2012 Report Share Posted April 6, 2012 In my opinion it is announceable NOT alertable BUT opponents are entitled to the full information so I think a convention card with the information on it is required and extending the announcement to 12-16(but always with clubs if at the weak end)would be suitable. It would come as a big surprise to the L&E if announcing was being abolished although, as said above, clubs can do that if they wish to do so. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgoetze Posted April 7, 2012 Report Share Posted April 7, 2012 I have advised Blue Club players to alert their 1NT opening.Wouldn't this entitle the opponents to assume that it was one ofii) artificial and strong iii) artificial guaranteeing 4+ cards in a specified suit and iv) three-suited.? (Not that I see clearly how they could be damaged by making this assumption, but you never know.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackshoe Posted April 7, 2012 Report Share Posted April 7, 2012 I differ, it seems, from others in that I don't believe that an alert entitles anyone to assume anything other than that they might want to ask what the alerted call means. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjj29 Posted April 7, 2012 Report Share Posted April 7, 2012 I differ, it seems, from others in that I don't believe that an alert entitles anyone to assume anything other than that they might want to ask what the alerted call means.They are entitled to assume it's not a non-alertable meaning. Of course, given how similar you can be to a non-alertable meaning and need an alert this might not help, but... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finch Posted April 7, 2012 Report Share Posted April 7, 2012 Look, I'm sorry. I was just hoping for a definitive answer from those responsible for writing the regulations. If you want a definitive answer, write to the L&E. This is the internet. Even if you get an answer from one or more of those responsible for writing the regulations, it is still not demonstrably anything more than a matter of opinion. FWIW I agree with gnasher (and others) that you should give a slightly expanded announcement. I seem to remember that we deliberately didn't change the regulations because we didn't want people going mad with their personalised announcements. I think that, technically, you are within the rules if all you say is "12-16" (assuming that the '12-13 with clubs' option is still a balanced hand) but I agree I don't like it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluejak Posted April 9, 2012 Report Share Posted April 9, 2012 Wouldn't this entitle the opponents to assume that it was one of ? (Not that I see clearly how they could be damaged by making this assumption, but you never know.)If you are damaged by your own assumptions, tough luck. An alert says there is something it is worth finding out. Not finding out and complaining it is not what you thought is neither MI nor a reason for sympathy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hrothgar Posted April 9, 2012 Report Share Posted April 9, 2012 Can the hand with clubs be unbalanced or semi-balanced? Can it contain a second suit? FWIW, the classic Blue Team Club 1NT open showed either A balanced hand with 16-17 HCP ORA 5-3-3-2 patter with 5 clubs and 13-15 HCP The primary design goal was to beef up the 1D openings and ensure that it promised a real suit... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackshoe Posted April 9, 2012 Report Share Posted April 9, 2012 Thanks. I haven't looked at Blue Team Club in years, and I'd forgotten that aspect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted April 10, 2012 Report Share Posted April 10, 2012 I seem to remember that we deliberately didn't change the regulations because we didn't want people going mad with their personalised announcements. A good way to achieve that would have been to add this to the rules: "The prescribed announcements may be added to by players if doing so aids full disclosure in a concise fashion. Players should, however, refrain from going mad with their personalised announcements." I think that's better than deciding that you want the rules to be different in practice from their literal meaning, but that you don't want everyone to know about it. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oof Arted Posted April 10, 2012 Report Share Posted April 10, 2012 hmmm our td in Leeds told me. But I can't find it anywhere on the EBU site. So I guess I was wrong. :angry: Tell that TD to read the OB or seek advice 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ant590 Posted April 14, 2012 Report Share Posted April 14, 2012 It seems that a couple of clubs in Yorkshire have a homebrew rule that 1NT is only announceable when it isn't 12-14. Perhaps Leeds have gone one step further. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oof Arted Posted April 16, 2012 Report Share Posted April 16, 2012 It seems that a couple of clubs in Yorkshire have a homebrew rule that 1NT is only announceable when it isn't 12-14. Perhaps Leeds have gone one step further. :rolleyes: Perhaps indeed , But I am curious what happens when a stranger plays there And I assume they follow the Laws/regulations for Intercity matches :P 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.