"Not Discussed"

[gordontd]

I might answer "of course we can play transfer advances of 1-level overcalls!"

I think I might not categorise you as inexperienced, Michael :)

[SimonFa]

 

I often say something like "we have no specific agreement about this, but I think the usual treatment of this call would make it alertable", or "we haven't specifically agreed this, but I think it follows from our other agreements that it will have an alertable meaning".

 

Thanks, I shall try to use that in future.

 

To everyone else, thanks for the thoughts and I'll try to be a better opponent in the future.

 

Simon

[barmar]

In my experience, there are a few things you can be fairly safe assuming with any but the most inexperienced partner. They include Stayman over an opening 1NT (though not necessarily over an overcall, especially if you partner is a rubber bridge player), some sort of Stayman over an opening 2NT, and the Unusual NT.

You'd think so, wouldn't you? But I was playing in an online indy a 2 weeks ago (it was one of BBO's "Express" tourney, where there's no chat allowed and everyone is theoretically supposed to be playing 2/1). Partner passed my Unusual 2NT with a 5-card fit for one of my suits:

[hv=lin=pn|barmar,West,North,~~M19426|st%7C%7Cmd%7C3S7QH568JAD3479ACT%2CS368TAH27KD256JC2%2CS5H349TQDQKC4579Q%2C%7Crh%7C%7Cah%7CBoard%205%7Csv%7Cn%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7C1C%7Cmb%7C2N%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cpc%7CS6%7Cpc%7CS5%7Cpc%7CSK%7Cpc%7CS7%7Cpc%7CS9%7Cpc%7CSQ%7Cpc%7CSA%7Cpc%7CH3%7Cpc%7CST%7Cpc%7CH4%7Cpc%7CS4%7Cpc%7CD3%7Cpc%7CS3%7Cpc%7CHQ%7Cpc%7CS2%7Cpc%7CD4%7Cpc%7CS8%7Cpc%7CC4%7Cpc%7CSJ%7Cpc%7CD7%7Cpc%7CCK%7Cpc%7CCT%7Cpc%7CC2%7Cpc%7CC5%7Cpc%7CCA%7Cpc%7CH5%7Cpc%7CH2%7Cpc%7CC7%7Cpc%7CD8%7Cpc%7CD9%7Cpc%7CD2%7Cpc%7CDK%7Cpc%7CCQ%7Cpc%7CC8%7Cpc%7CH6%7Cpc%7CD5%7Cpc%7CHT%7Cpc%7CC6%7Cpc%7CHA%7Cpc%7CH7%7Cpc%7CH8%7Cpc%7CHK%7Cpc%7CH9%7Cpc%7CC3%7Cpc%7CD6%7Cpc%7CDQ%7Cpc%7CDT%7Cpc%7CDA%7Cpc%7CHJ%7Cpc%7CDJ%7Cpc%7CC9%7Cpc%7CCJ%7C]400|300[/hv]

Luckily, -300 was still a 55% board, since the opponents can make 4♠.

[mycroft]

Yeah, I would Alert 3♣, and explain as "no agreement about any followups to 2NT; however, we agreed Stayman and transfers over 1NT." Which is what we did.

 

Depending on the area, and whether I know the local community, I might say that "common systems over 2NT around here are Stayman and Baron" - if, of course, they aren't from the local community (and were it true - it certainly isn't in my area; but my area doesn't Alert 3♣ unless it *doesn't* ask for major suit lengths).

 

Hmm. I wonder if Baron/2NT is Alertable here, and whether I should play it just for the amusement factor.

[bluejak]

The one question this thread raises in my mind is: why on earth is Stayman alertable in the EBU?

The problem with questions about alerting is that they usually are concerned with why one particular agreement is alertable, and do not consider the overall. The answer to your question is that what is alertable depends on the following factors:

 

• easy memorable rules
  
• history of bridge in the jurisidiction
  
• consistency between similar things, like treating artificial bids the same
  
• general knowledge of players
  
• rules to satisfy a variety of different player levels
  

[mgoetze]

The problem with questions about alerting is that they usually are concerned with why one particular agreement is alertable, and do not consider the overall.

When I tried to ponder the overall scheme of German alert regulations, my brain exploded. But of course the EBU regulations might be much more sensible in that regard.