Alerts

[sceptic]

I run some tourneys (for fun) I am one of the unwashed technically incompetant TD's that you hear about, I have noticed that most of the non alert complaints come from SAYC or 2/1 players about polish club and precision players.

 

what I would like to hear is opinions about my attitude towards this.

 

As it is a Global site surely the ones that play SAYC and 2/1 dont alert their standard bids so why should the ones playing other systems, surely both sides are disavantaged this way.

 

I could cure this by running one system only tourneys but thats no fun.

 

anyway i am sure there is an answer for the Tourneys I run that is amicable to all, IF they want correctness and strict rules then they can play at ACBL tourneys and pay for the privalige.

 

If you think my attitude is stupid please feel free to say,I have a thick skin :0

[nickf]

Everybody...repeat after me.

 

F-U-L-L

D-I-S-C-L-O-S-U-R-E

 

write it out a hundred times. remember it, use it, live it.

 

 

what does it mean? It's really really simple.

 

Full disclosure means alerting and giving full explanations about bids that are either not natural or cannot reasonable be expected to be understood by your opponents. Like transfers or support doubles or splinters or cue bids or bergen jumps or archimedes or polish 1C openers.

 

It doesnt matter if you play vanilla sayc or precision - just alert and explain your bids. It's not hard. It takes a bit of effort though. And you know what? If you start today, perhaps your opponents will appreciate it and start alerting too. Then what might happen?

 

nickf

sydney

[hotShot]

Everybody...repeat after me.

 

F-U-L-L

D-I-S-C-L-O-S-U-R-E

 

write it out a hundred times. remember it, use it, live it.

 

 

what does it mean? It's really really simple.

 

Full disclosure means alerting and giving full explanations about bids that are either not natural or cannot reasonable be expected to be understood by your opponents. Like transfers or support doubles or splinters or cue bids or bergen jumps or archimedes or polish 1C openers.

 

It doesnt matter if you play vanilla sayc or precision - just alert and explain your bids. It's not hard. It takes a bit of effort though. And you know what? If you start today, perhaps your opponents will appreciate it and start alerting too. Then what might happen?

 

nickf

sydney

Please don't Quote only a part of the bridge laws it is not only:

 

F-U-L-L

D-I-S-C-L-O-S-U-R-E

 

but

 

F-U-L-L

D-I-S-C-L-O-S-U-R-E

o-f

p-a-r-t-n-e-r-s-h-i-p

a-g-r-e-e-m-e-n-t-s

 

agreeing on SAYC, 2/1 or 'you name it' of cause, brings a full load of agreements with it.

 

Here at BBO without anything said, the system is BBO-Basic (which is close to SAYC). So everyone playing something else should inform opps prior to the first bid of a round.

 

As TD you should enforce alerting, on any system.

But because those playing Polish Club or Precision, will usually know BBO-Basic/SAYC better as the other way round. THe disadvantage is more on one side.

You should warn the players not alerting and check if the score needs to be corrected. Often there is no need to adjust, because not alerting alone is not enough to result in a score correction. There has to be a connection betreen the missing alert and e.g. a missing contract or a wrong lead from the opps.

[spwdo]

Hi,

 

Alert every conventional bid and explain bid(full disclosure) when opps ask seems to be a good rule for online tourney`s , that doesnt use specific rules(ACBL, IBF ,WBF).

[inquiry]

Alert is easy.. if you make a bid that isn't natural or is forcing when not a new natural suit, then alert it.. simple as that... even stayman.... No harm can be done.

 

1H - 1NT (alert forcing) - 2C (alert maybe 3 card suit)

 

2C (alert Strong forcing, artificial)

 

1NT - 2C (alert stayman)

 

1NT - 2H (alert transfer)

 

1H - 1S - 2C - 2D (alert 4th suit forcing)

 

IF your 1S is forcing on the following acution, ieven if it promises spades, then alert it..

 

1C - 1H - 1S (alert, natural forcing)....

 

 

These alerts are easy on line, they give partner no information, they make sure you get that FULL DISCLOSURE stuff. What is the harm in doing the right thing in a tourney or in the main room.

 

We had in another thread where the auction went...

 

1S - 2C - 2D <<--- let's start with 2C.. was it game force? If so, then alert as GF. What was 2D? Opener had a three card suit, but it was a "natural bid". If 2C had been alerted as game force, no need to alert 2D as forcing. Even if 2C was not game force, no sane system says 2D can be passed, so it would be forcing and no need to alert. The fact that 2D bidder had only 3D's? No big deal. IT was a natural bid, so no need to alert, but no harm can be done if it was alerted as occassionally or often three card suit.

 

 

 

ben

[hrothgar]

Hi,

 

Alert every conventional bid and explain bid(full disclosure) when opps ask seems to be a good rule for online tourney`s , that doesnt use specific rules(ACBL, IBF ,WBF).

Actually, your advocating adopting the EBU alert standard. From my persepctive, this is the worst of the bunch...

 

Too many alerts are every bit as bad as too few alerts.

 

Consider the following extreme examples:

 

1. 0% percent of all bids are alerted

2. 100% percent of all bids are alerted

 

Regardless of which case you look at, the presence/absence of an alert convey's zero information.

 

If the opponents open 1NT, I don't need an alert to tell me that their 2♣ advance is Stayman rather than Clubs.

 

I would, however, like to know that their artificial 2♣ response is "Keri" rather than simple Stayman...

 

The British have gone out of their way to create an alert system that is extremely simple to use. With this said and done, it fails to actually provide any useful information. Its as if they created an alert system in order to have an "alert system" rather than fulfilling a set of customer requirements.

[spwdo]

Hi,

 

Alert every conventional bid  and explain bid(full disclosure) when opps ask seems to be a good rule for  online tourney`s , that doesnt use specific rules(ACBL, IBF ,WBF).

Actually, your advocating adopting the EBU alert standard. From my persepctive, this is the worst of the bunch...

 

Too many alerts are every bit as bad as too few alerts.

 

Consider the following extreme examples:

 

1. 0% percent of all bids are alerted

2. 100% percent of all bids are alerted

 

Regardless of which case you look at, the presence/absence of an alert convey's zero information.

 

If the opponents open 1NT, I don't need an alert to tell me that their 2♣ advance is Stayman rather than Clubs.

 

I would, however, like to know that their artificial 2♣ response is "Keri" rather than simple Stayman...

 

The British have gone out of their way to create an alert system that is extremely simple to use. With this said and done, it fails to actually provide any useful information. Its as if they created an alert system in order to have an "alert system" rather than fulfilling a set of customer requirements.

hi Richard ,

 

we agree to disagree :P, i feel and think that even stayman is alertable, no harm in that.Btw i hardly ever click on any bid when its alerted for asking an explanation, 99% its obviuos.

 

We cant expect from a natural 2♣ opening in precision that they alert it if strong arteficial 2♣ are never alerted cause "everybody" knows it .

 

Playing those rules there is ACBL where a lot of the common conventions are not alertable.

 

Im not advocating any rules, i just give my opinion on the matter.This rule seems to work just fine for me and tourneys i hold and gives no room whatsoever to discussion.Fail to alert once=warning(+adjust if damage), fail to alert twice=adjust(even without damage) always done the thing for me, players know it and i can count on one hand the alert issues or problematic players(that often dont alert) in my tourneys

 

Marc

[hrothgar]

Alert is easy.. if you make a bid that isn't natural or is forcing when not a new natural suit, then alert it.. simple as that... even stayman.... No harm can be done.

 

1H - 1NT (alert forcing) - 2C (alert maybe 3 card suit)

 

2C (alert Strong forcing, artificial)

 

1NT - 2C (alert stayman)

 

1NT - 2H (alert transfer)

...

 

 

These alerts are easy on line, they give partner no information, they make sure you get that FULL DISCLOSURE stuff. What is the harm in doing the right thing in a tourney or in the main room.

The problem is very simple... You are overloading the channel

Your alerts are so frequent that they provide no useful information

You are obsessing over form while ignoring function

[EricK]

Alert is easy.. if you make a bid that isn't natural or is forcing when not a new natural suit, then alert it.. simple as that... even stayman.... No harm can be done.

 

1H - 1NT (alert forcing) - 2C (alert maybe 3 card suit)

 

2C (alert Strong forcing, artificial)

 

1NT - 2C (alert stayman)

 

1NT - 2H (alert transfer)

...

 

 

These alerts are easy on line, they give partner no information, they make sure you get that FULL DISCLOSURE stuff. What is the harm in doing the right thing in a tourney or in the main room.

The problem is very simple... You are overloading the channel

Your alerts are so frequent that they provide no useful information

You are obsessing over form while ignoring function

Online and FTF are different.

 

Online I alert 2♣ and immediately write "Stayman" or "Keri" or whatever, and opps know (or know to ask more). In FTF the opponents don't know to ask, and I can't say without their asking.

 

This is why the "English" way may be bad in a FTF environment, but is OK online (as long as the bids are explained (or at least named) at the same time).

 

Eric

[hrothgar]

Alert is easy.. if you make a bid that isn't natural or is forcing when not a new natural suit, then alert it.. simple as that... even stayman.... No harm can be done.

 

1H - 1NT (alert forcing) - 2C (alert maybe 3 card suit)

 

2C (alert Strong forcing, artificial)

 

1NT - 2C (alert stayman)

 

1NT - 2H (alert transfer)

...

 

 

These alerts are easy on line, they give partner no information, they make sure you get that FULL DISCLOSURE stuff. What is the harm in doing the right thing in a tourney or in the main room.

The problem is very simple... You are overloading the channel

Your alerts are so frequent that they provide no useful information

You are obsessing over form while ignoring function

Online and FTF are different.

 

Online I alert 2♣ and immediately write "Stayman" or "Keri" or whatever, and opps know (or know to ask more). In FTF the opponents don't know to ask, and I can't say without their asking.

 

This is why the "English" way may be bad in a FTF environment, but is OK online (as long as the bids are explained (or at least named) at the same time).

 

Eric

This is a very different issue.

 

The actual standard being proposed in not alert all artificial bids but announce the meaning of all artificial bids.

 

Certainly a worthy goal, however, I'm worried whether this is attainable.

At the very least, I think that significant software enhancement such as an automated alet/announcement scheme will be required....

[inquiry]

Alert is easy.. if you make a bid that isn't natural or is forcing when not a new natural suit, then alert it.. simple as that... even stayman.... No harm can be done.

 

1H - 1NT (alert forcing) - 2C (alert maybe 3 card suit)

 

2C (alert Strong forcing, artificial)

 

1NT - 2C (alert stayman)

 

1NT - 2H (alert transfer)

...

 

 

These alerts are easy on line, they give partner no information, they make sure you get that FULL DISCLOSURE stuff. What is the harm in doing the right thing in a tourney or in the main room.

The problem is very simple... You are overloading the channel

Your alerts are so frequent that they provide no useful information

You are obsessing over form while ignoring function

The bbo alert rules are simple. If you read teh guidelines on the rules of this site, you will find the following statements....

 

"we ahve members form all over the world as well as members of all levels of ability and experience, not all players will agree on which bids should be alerted and which should be considerred standard. "

 

"It is up to our members to try their best to provide their opponents with information theat that may be helfful to them.... it is against the laws and spirit of the game of bridge to conceal information about your partnership agreement"

 

"BBO software is designed so that players alert their own bids. This is called "self-alerting" .... If you have any doubt as to whether one of your bids should be alerted or not, it is appropriate to alert.

 

I take this to mean, playing against an unknown pair, I pretty much alert anything that is not natural and can be passed. Playing against you, richard, I would not alert stayman, I would not alert 2/1 GF, I would probably not alert jacoby transfer. The standard here is is to whether or not there is a reasonable possibility my bid may be misunderstood by the opponents. I use not to alert anyone who was labelled advanced or expert, but experience has shown, that even with players with these labels, otherwise "normal" auctions seem to cause them problems without some otherwise rather unnecessariy alerts.

 

On top of this, I don't understand the comment that I am overlaading the channel, saying "transfer" or "stayman" hardly overloads.. .and my auctions almost never have more than 2 or 3 alearts, and most oftne none... Compare that with moscito or polish club auctions. Ideally, a 1H or 1S bid polish club should be alerted as limited.. I never see that happening,, but against me, it is unnecessary. BUt against others, it would be.

 

Ben

[hrothgar]

Alert is easy.. if you make a bid that isn't natural or is forcing when not a new natural suit, then alert it.. simple as that... even stayman.... No harm can be done.

 

1H - 1NT (alert forcing) - 2C (alert maybe 3 card suit)

 

2C (alert Strong forcing, artificial)

 

1NT - 2C (alert stayman)

 

1NT - 2H (alert transfer)

...

 

 

These alerts are easy on line, they give partner no information, they make sure you get that FULL DISCLOSURE stuff. What is the harm in doing the right thing in a tourney or in the main room.

The problem is very simple... You are overloading the channel

Your alerts are so frequent that they provide no useful information

You are obsessing over form while ignoring function

The bbo alert rules are simple. If you read teh guidelines on the rules of this site, you will find the following statements....

 

"we ahve members form all over the world as well as members of all levels of ability and experience, not all players will agree on which bids should be alerted and which should be considerred standard. "

 

"It is up to our members to try their best to provide their opponents with information theat that may be helfful to them.... it is against the laws and spirit of the game of bridge to conceal information about your partnership agreement"

 

"BBO software is designed so that players alert their own bids. This is called "self-alerting" .... If you have any doubt as to whether one of your bids should be alerted or not, it is appropriate to alert.

 

I take this to mean, playing against an unknown pair, I pretty much alert anything that is not natural and can be passed. Playing against you, richard, I would not alert stayman, I would not alert 2/1 GF, I would probably not alert jacoby transfer. The standard here is is to whether or not there is a reasonable possibility my bid may be misunderstood by the opponents. I use not to alert anyone who was labelled advanced or expert, but experience has shown, that even with players with these labels, otherwise "normal" auctions seem to cause them problems without some otherwise rather unnecessariy alerts.

 

On top of this, I don't understand the comment that I am overlaading the channel, saying "transfer" or "stayman" hardly overloads.. .and my auctions almost never have more than 2 or 3 alearts, and most oftne none... Compare that with moscito or polish club auctions. Ideally, a 1H or 1S bid polish club should be alerted as limited.. I never see that happening,, but against me, it is unnecessary. BUt against others, it would be.

 

Ben

I'll reference the last posting.

 

There is a difference between an alert and an announcement.

[KiwiBridge]

The whole point in playing a standard system is to enable you to play with a pick-up partner without the over alert syndrome. When you join a bridge club, you are expected to have learnt the standard system. There is no merit that I can see in alerting 2♣ Stayman. The only time you should alert is when you have a non-standard agreement. Jacoby transfers over 1NT are also standard, so should be understood by all. You should never alert without providing an explanation at the same time, that only frustrates the opponents. When playing standard, I never have to alert. When playing Acol, I say at the start "Hi Opps, we play Acol 12-15NT and 4 card suits, we will alert all non-SAYC bids". Every time I open 1NT I alert "12-15". I never alert Stayman and Jacoby regardless of which system I am playing.

[the hog]

"If the opponents open 1NT, I don't need an alert to tell me that their 2♣ advance is Stayman rather than Clubs.

 

I would, however, like to know that their artificial 2♣ response is "Keri" rather than simple Stayman... "

 

Fwiw I agree with Spwdo. If you alert some artificial bids and not others there is a very real problem with UI if a bid is not alerted. I believe that all artificial bids including stayman should be alerted. NT ranges and similar should be disclosed at the beginning of a round. There is no need to alert the NTs every time you make the bid.

[KiwiBridge]

Stayman is so universally used, it is no longer deemed artificial, that is my point. To quote from New Zealand's bridge laws where Acol is the accepted standard system:-

 

===============================================

Calls Which Should NOT Be Alerted

 

Acol 2C opening and 2D negative response.

 

Simple Stayman 2C responses in reply to partner's opening bid of 1NT and the 2D response. Stayman 2C following an opponent’s double should be alerted.

 

Any other use of the above 2C or 2D bids must be alerted, even if they are natural calls showing the suit.

 

All calls at the 4 level or higher should not be alerted except conventional opening suit bids. Where a call which should not be alerted during the auction has a meaning that the opponents could not be expected to understand, it is appropriate for them to be alerted to this fact.

 

================================================

We are required to alert transfers, as they are still considered artifical, even though 99% play them.

 

We also have to alert certain types of double:-

 

Doubles Which Must Be Alerted

 

Any double of a suit bid at the 1 or 2 level which is not for takeout should be alerted.

 

Any double of No Trump bid at the 1 or 2 level which does not indicate only general strength and a desire to penalise should be alerted.

 

Other doubles should not be alerted unless they have a meaning that the opponents could not be expected to understand.

[epeeist]

....

If you alert some artificial bids and not others there is a very real problem with UI if a bid is not alerted. I believe that all artificial bids including stayman should be alerted. NT ranges and similar should be disclosed at the beginning of a round. There is no need to alert the NTs every time you make the bid.

....

Since on BBO alerts and explanations appear only to your opponents, how can there be UI? I agree with you for FTF, but not for online play (unless I'm missing some subtlety).

 

As for NT ranges, unless using convention cards, there are so many possible things including NT point ranges or weak suit opening values which the opponents could be told, isn't it simpler to simply, if one opens 1NT, click and type "15-17" (or "12-14" or whatever)? Or if one opens 3♥ ("weak usu. 7+ ♥) or the like?

 

Replying to the original post, as a player I care less about alerts than explanations. If I am unsure about an opponent's bid, I ask. When I ask what a Polish club opening and reply mean, about half the time I get a satisfactory response (point range for balanced/unbalanced/whatever, I can't recall exactly which is why I always ask). The other half the time I get an answer of simply "polish club" or something similarly uninformative (to me, at least).

 

Even more frequently, about half the time I get unsatisfactory answers to, believe it or not, my request for an explanation of what 4NT (and the response) means. I don't necessarily know whether opponents are using normal or rkcb or a void-showing system, or if it's a quantitative raise or slam-invitational. A response of "no agreement" is fine, because then I know as much as the relevant opponent. What I don't like are the sarcastic responses ("what do you think?" and the like). And yes, there have been occasions when my asking for meanings revealed that my opponents misunderstood what each thought the other meant. I've been told that ethically, it is permissible to take advantage of a known opponent misunderstanding (e.g. by doubling... <_< ).

[McBruce]

Why is it that any discussion of what should be alerted on BBO inevitably ends with some reference to some FTF bridge organizations rules?

 

What the ACBL or EBU or NZBA or whatever does in FTF play is completely irrelevant to online play. That should be the first rule:

 

1. Failure to alert something because you don't have to at the bridge club down the road is taking a risk here, because players in another hemisphere play at a different club with different rules.

 

The second rule should be about self-explanations and why the online world has very little need for Law 16.

 

2. Here in the online world, we can talk privately to both or either opponents when we need to let them know details of the bids we make. There is no way to pass unauthorized information if you keep it private. We alert and explain our own bids and partner hears and sees nothing.

 

Now that that is out of the way, what to alert...

 

3. Alert any call you make that is, by partnership agreement, conventional. If you bid diamonds and by agreement you have no intention of playing in diamonds, that's an alert. If you bid notrump and by agreement you have an unbalanced hand, that's an alert. We all have an idea of the simple bidding novices use. If you're beyond that and your opponents may be novices, you owe them an alert when you make one of these advanced calls. It doesn't matter what your national bridge organization says. Online is different.

 

...and what to do when the opponents ask:

 

4. When you are asked privately for an explanation of a bid, remember that your answer will not be heard by anyone other than the questioner. You can tell the questioner everything and partner will never get any unauthorized information. If it's a silly question and you make a great sarcastic comment, nobody else will hear how witty you are, and the questioner will simply ask again--so don't bother. It wastes time.

 

Anything else we need? I don't think so. Common sense is far better than dozens of pages of regulations.

[bearmum]

Why is it that any discussion of what should be alerted on BBO inevitably ends with some reference to some FTF bridge organizations rules?

 

What the ACBL or EBU or NZBA or whatever does in FTF play is completely irrelevant to online play.  That should be the first rule:

 

1.  Failure to alert something because you don't have to at the bridge club down the road is taking a risk here, because players in another hemisphere play at a different club with different rules.

 

The second rule should be about self-explanations and why the online world has very little need for Law 16.

 

2.  Here in the online world, we can talk privately to both or either opponents when we need to let them know details of the bids we make.  There is no way to pass unauthorized information if you keep it private.  We alert and explain our own bids and partner hears and sees nothing.

 

Now that that is out of the way, what to alert...

 

3.  Alert any call you make that is, by partnership agreement, conventional.  If you bid diamonds and by agreement you have no intention of playing in diamonds, that's an alert.  If you bid notrump and by agreement you have an unbalanced hand, that's an alert.  We all have an idea of the simple bidding novices use.  If you're beyond that and your opponents may be novices, you owe them an alert when you make one of these advanced calls.  It doesn't matter what your national bridge organization says.  Online is different.

 

...and what to do when the opponents ask:

 

4.  When you are asked privately for an explanation of a bid, remember that your answer will not be heard by anyone other than the questioner.  You can tell the questioner everything and partner will never get any unauthorized information.  If it's a silly question and you make a great sarcastic comment, nobody else will hear how witty you are, and the questioner will simply ask again--so don't bother.  It wastes time.

 

Anything else we need?  I don't think so.  Common sense is far better than dozens of pages of regulations.

WELL SAID McBruce

[SirSatai]

yes alert and information are big problem i deciede to give A- who did not alert or dont give info

what do you think is it ok??

[inquiry]

yes alert and information are big problem i deciede to give A- who did not alert or dont give info

what do you think is it ok??

As TD host, these rules are up to you. But for me, there must be at least a chance that the failure to ALERT has caused some damage to the non-offending side, before I would consider an adjustment.

[hrothgar]

Why is it that any discussion of what should be alerted on BBO inevitably ends with some reference to some FTF bridge organizations rules?

 

What the ACBL or EBU or NZBA or whatever does in FTF play is completely irrelevant to online play. That should be the first rule:

Regulations are specific to the sponsoring authority.

For better or worse, Online Bridge does not have its own sponsoring authority.

Instead, the landscape is fractured.

 

ACBL Online tournaments are run using ACBL regulations

EBU's online tournaments are run using EBU regulations

When you host tournaments, you get to use whatever alert regulations you want.

 

At some point in time, this may change. Its entirely possible that the WBF will decide to create a Zonal authority with global responsibility for Online Bridge (I have mixed emotions about this concept)

 

However, until the Alert standards offered by different sponsoring authorities:

 

1. Are useful as examples

2. Carry at least as much weight as your opinions regarding what is right and proper