Is it a correc t alert?

[patroclo]

After a 1 c open lho said 2 nt and alert it saying it is D and S. During the play i see that the hand is a 3 suit hand with 4 h 4 s and 5 d. It is a my fault to think tha the hand was a bicolor or the alert with a 3 suit hand was misleading.

Thanks for answer

Gigi

P.s. With 4 card of H i compete in an heart contract with tragical consequences. :)

[wank]

you are entitled to know what he showed, not what he had. obviously we don't really know what it showed, but there's no evidence his description wasn't an accurate reflection of the methods. after all, he did have both spades and diamonds.

[patroclo]

you are entitled to know what he showed, not what he had. obviously we don't really know what it showed, but there's no evidence his description wasn't an accurate reflection of the methods. after all, he did have both spades and diamonds.

With a 3 suited hand what is the rule.One may choose a bid that show 2 suit casually.

[PhilKing]

With a 3 suited hand what is the rule.One may choose a bid that show 2 suit casually.

 

He has to tell you what the bid means, not what he has. He can bid 2NT on any hand he wants - that's the rule.

 

It's basically mostly covered by law 40 (a couple of other laws may sometimes apply as well), which you can find by googling the laws of contract bridge.

 

If it's any consolation, he will score far more own goals than goals playing like this.

[Vampyr]

With a 3 suited hand what is the rule.One may choose a bid that show 2 suit casually.

 

A person with a three-suited hand can certainly choose two of them to show. with three suits excluding the one opened, a takeout double seems more sensible, and making a 2-suited bid forcing to the three level with only nine cards is pretty foolhardy; however, if the description given was correct, it does not seem that the player did anything wrong.

[Vampyr]

He has to tell you what the bid means, not what he has. He can bid 2NT on any hand he wants - that's the rule.

 

 

That depends. OP does not mention his jurisdiction, but in the ACBL it is not permitted to psyche artificial bids. Perhaps there is such a rule in other places as well.

[PhilKing]

That depends. OP does not mention his jurisdiction,

 

This. Local officials know best imo.

[aguahombre]

That depends. OP does not mention his jurisdiction, but in the ACBL it is not permitted to psyche artificial bids. Perhaps there is such a rule in other places as well.

That is not true. Certain artificial opening bids, yes.

[Vampyr]

That is not true. Certain artificial opening bids, yes.

 

Yes, sorry. I remembered the regulation very poorly:

 

[Disallowed]2. Psyching of artificial or conventional opening bids and/or conventional

responses thereto. Psyching conventional suit responses, which are less than

2NT, to natural openings.

[patroclo]

That depends. OP does not mention his jurisdiction, but in the ACBL it is not permitted to psyche artificial bids. Perhaps there is such a rule in other places as well.

I played it in a bbo tourney, and the alert was made by the player that has bid it

[aguahombre]

I played it in a bbo tourney, and the alert was made by the player that has bid it

That might feel sleezy, but it isn't wrong. With self-alerting (screens or on-line) we still disclose agreements, not what we have in our hands.

[patroclo]

That might feel sleezy, but it isn't wrong. With self-alerting (screens or on-line) we still disclose agreements, not what we have in our hands.

I'm not a convention expert but if i bid 2 nt with diamond and spade, Probably there is a bid when i have diamond and heart or heart and spade. With 3 suit what is the way of choice.

[barmar]

I'm not a convention expert but if i bid 2 nt with diamond and spade, Probably there is a bid when i have diamond and heart or heart and spade. With 3 suit what is the way of choice.

If your hand is strong enough, a takeout double is usually the choice with 3 suits. I'm guessing that in this case his hand wasn't strong enough, so he chose the more preemptive bid.

[aguahombre]

Yes, someone once told me that a double of an opening suit bid suggests support for the other 3 suits. That concept might catch on, some day.

[Vampyr]

I'm not a convention expert but if i bid 2 nt with diamond and spade, Probably there is a bid when i have diamond and heart or heart and spade. With 3 suit what is the way of choice.

 

If a person has three suits and has a way to show two, he can show whichever two he wants.

[Vampyr]

That might feel sleezy, but it isn't wrong. With self-alerting (screens or on-line) we still disclose agreements, not what we have in our hands.

 

Why is it sleazy? Perhaps he promises ten cards, but he has nine and chose to make a two-suited bid. Maybe he even promises only nine.

[barmar]

What people find "sleezy" is making a self-alert that doesn't describe your actual hand. The people who think this just don't understand how disclosure is supposed to work.

[Bbradley62]

The "jurisdiction" is BBO Hornets:[hv=lin=pn|t_o_m2,BaHeRR,patroclo,gymy25|st%7C%7Cmd%7C4S8TJKH37JQD8ACTJQ%2CS679AH2459D469QKC%2CS4H68KAD2357C234K%2C%7Crh%7C%7Cah%7CBoard%206%7Csv%7Ce%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7C1C%7Cmb%7C2N%7Can%7C%21S%2B%21D%7Cmb%7Cd%7Cmb%7C3S%7Cmb%7Cd%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7C4C%7Cmb%7Cd%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7C4H%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7Cd%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cpc%7CDJ%7Cpc%7CDA%7Cpc%7CD6%7Cpc%7CD2%7Cpc%7CH3%7Cpc%7CH4%7Cpc%7CHA%7Cpc%7CHT%7Cpc%7CHK%7Cpc%7CS5%7Cpc%7CH7%7Cpc%7CH2%7Cpc%7CH6%7Cpc%7CC5%7Cpc%7CHJ%7Cpc%7CH5%7Cpc%7CCQ%7Cpc%7CS6%7Cpc%7CC2%7Cpc%7CCA%7Cpc%7CDT%7Cpc%7CD8%7Cpc%7CDQ%7Cpc%7CD3%7Cpc%7CH9%7Cpc%7CH8%7Cpc%7CS2%7Cpc%7CHQ%7Cpc%7CCJ%7Cpc%7CS7%7Cpc%7CC3%7Cpc%7CC6%7Cpc%7CCT%7Cpc%7CS9%7Cpc%7CCK%7Cpc%7CC7%7Cpc%7CC4%7Cpc%7CC8%7Cpc%7CS8%7Cpc%7CD4%7Cpc%7CC9%7Cpc%7CST%7Cpc%7CD9%7Cpc%7CD5%7Cpc%7CS3%7Cpc%7CSK%7Cmc%7C7%7C]360|270[/hv]E/W is an established partnership who appear to play other two-suited overcalls as well: [hv=lin=pn|BaHeRR,nesaw,gymy25,fedordj|st%7C%7Cmd%7C2S9H28QD239JQAC6TK%2CS234TKH569TKAD8C4%2CS57QHD467TKC378JA%2C%7Crh%7C%7Cah%7CBoard%204%7Csv%7Cb%7Cmb%7C1H%7Cmb%7C3C%7Can%7Cminors%7Cmb%7C3H%7Cmb%7C5D%7Cmb%7C5H%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7C6C%7Cmb%7Cd%7Cmb%7C6D%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7Cd%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cpc%7CHA%7Cpc%7CD4%7Cpc%7CH4%7Cpc%7CH8%7Cpc%7CD6%7Cpc%7CD5%7Cpc%7CDQ%7Cpc%7CD8%7Cpc%7CD2%7Cpc%7CS3%7Cpc%7CDT%7Cpc%7CH3%7Cpc%7CC3%7Cpc%7CC2%7Cpc%7CCK%7Cpc%7CC4%7Cpc%7CCT%7Cpc%7CH5%7Cpc%7CC7%7Cpc%7CCQ%7Cpc%7CSA%7Cpc%7CS9%7Cpc%7CS2%7Cmc%7C11%7C]360|270[/hv]

[aguahombre]

Why is it sleazy? Perhaps he promises ten cards, but he has nine and chose to make a two-suited bid. Maybe he even promises only nine.

Perhaps a more careful reading of my post would discover that I didn't call it sleezy. I said it might feel sleezy to the poster who brought up the self-alert issue, but that it (disclosing actual agreements) was not wrong.

 

You and Barmar are actually agreeing with what I wrote.

[barmar]

You and Barmar are actually agreeing with what I wrote.

That was my intent.

[Bbradley62]

.. but it isn't wrong. With self-alerting (screens or on-line) we still disclose agreements, not what we have in our hands.

...however, if the description given was correct, it does not seem that the player did anything wrong.

I hate the description of North's actions as "not wrong", which makes it sound like he could/should have done better if he had wanted to do so. If E/W's partnership agreement is that the 2NT bid shows ♦ and ♠, then North's alert and explanation of his bid as such are absolutely required by the rules of the game.

Edited October 8, 2012 by Bbradley62

[aguahombre]

In my world "not wrong" means o.k., right, acceptable, legal, and a bunch of other things. It doesn't mean a little bit wrong.

 

Choosing to show two suits with that hand is a decision within their agreements, IMO.

[barmar]

In my world "not wrong" means o.k., right, acceptable, legal, and a bunch of other things.

And most of those alternatives also have the same nuance -- they de-emphasize the rightness. E.g. saying something is "legal" often suggests "you can get away with it, because there's no law against it".

 

Using a more positive word emphasizes that not only CAN you do this, you SHOULD (and even MUST) do it.

[blackshoe]

That depends. OP does not mention his jurisdiction, but in the ACBL it is not permitted to psyche artificial bids. Perhaps there is such a rule in other places as well.

Not quite.

 

ACBL General Convention Chart, Item 2 under "Disallowed": Psyching of artificial or conventional opening bids and/or conventional responses thereto. Psyching conventional suit responses, which are less than 2NT, to natural openings.

It looks to me like the 2NT call in question was an overcall, not an opening bid, so the prohibition does not apply. I also suspect it happened online.

 

Added: Oops, I see this was already caught. Sorry. Gigi, please be aware that partnership agreements as to the meanings of bids are not promises to opponents. If the explanation of 2NT was correct, there has been no infraction of law, even if the player systemically had another call which might have better described his hand.

Edited October 8, 2012 by blackshoe

[ArtK78]

I really don't understand the point of this thread. The 2NT bid made showed spades and diamonds. The player had spades and diamonds. The fact that he also had hearts is not relevant.