Offer to explain?

[nige1]

The auction is

1♦ (2♦) _P (2♥)

3♣ (3♥) 4♣ (_P)

4♦ (_P) 4♥ (_P)

5♣ All pass

 

2♦ = Alerted and explained as Michaels.

4♦ = Kickback setting ♣ as trumps.

4♥ = One keycard.

 

Please assume a jurisdiction where conventional bids above 3N must not be alerted (unless on the first round of the auction).

Defenders ask no questions.

[aguahombre]

In jurisdictions where high bids are not alertable, but are defined as "delay alerts", the offer to explain (before the opening lead) consists of starting to explain.

 

If the opponents don't stop us, we do it.

[SteveMoe]

A simple statement that delayed alerts have occurred allows the opponents to ask what they want to know. Offering unsolicited explanations seems wrong, but I might be splicing hairs here.

[blackshoe]

Delayed alerts should be alerted, not just explained, but at the proper time, which depends on whether they're by the declaring or defending side.

[aguahombre]

The auction is over when the point of interest occurs. Whatever the side which needs to make a delayed alert does to bring it to light is mildly interesting. We can call it an offer to disclose, we can start to disclose, we can just say there is a delayed alert involved. It all gets the job done. What I see, like, and try to do is for the bidding side with the obligation to disclose to pause the replacement of bids into the box, and start to explain while the visual aids are still in place.

[blackshoe]

I wasn't stating an opinion, I was stating what the ACBL alert regulation requires*. I generally try to remember to leave my bidding cards out until the opening lead is faced, at least. If someone alerts before I pick them up, I leave them out until explanations are made, or it's clear no one's asking.

 

* I do recognize that some people will do whatever they damn well please, whatever the regulation says. :ph34r:

 

ACBL Alert Regulation: A delayed Alert is made as follows: Declaring side: the partner of the person making the Alertable call alerts after the auction is completed and prior to the opening lead. Defending side: the partner of the player making the Alertable call Alerts after the opening lead is made face-down and before the dummy is tabled.

[gnasher]

In the ACBL you make a delayed alert, as explained by other posters.

 

In England, you have no legal obligation to say anything, but I would tell the opponents anyway.

 

In Scotland, "At the end of the auction the declaring side should draw attention to any unusual features, particularly any unusual non-alerted calls".

 

Regardless of jurisdiction, I think that saying nothing is an indication that you hate either the game or your opponents.

[iviehoff]

Regardless of jurisdiction, I think that saying nothing is an indication that you hate either the game or your opponents.

I think it just shows respect for the rules we have in England, where saying nothing is surely normal. Given the variety in feature/control bidding styles, if the defenders are interested in what features/controls they think the other side might have been showing, they will surely ask. If they are sufficiently naive not to do so, they will surely soon learn.

[Vampyr]

In Scotland, "At the end of the auction the declaring side should draw attention to any unusual features, particularly any unusual non-alerted calls".

 

Oops. I lazily voted to say nothing because I assumed the Scots had a similar regulation to ours.

 

I think it just shows respect for the rules we have in England, where saying nothing is surely normal. Given the variety in feature/control bidding styles, if the defenders are interested in what features/controls they think the other side might have been showing, they will surely ask. If they are sufficiently naive not to do so, they will surely soon learn.

 

I agree. I do think that delayed/pre-alerts might be a good idea, one that we could potentially explore here. Things like transfer responses to 1♣, odd two-level opening, and the like; opponents don't always catch these, especially at the beginning of a 2-board round.

 

By the way, I am sure that the OP is grateful for all of the posts describing the regulation/procedure in the ACBL...

[gnasher]

By the way, I am sure that the OP is grateful for all of the posts describing the regulation/procedure in the ACBL...

I expect he is. It is, after all, what he asked for.

[gnasher]

I think it just shows respect for the rules we have in England, where saying nothing is surely normal.

To show respect for the rules, one simply has to obey them. Volunteering information in this situation isn't either required or prohibited. Therefore doing so shows neither respect nor disrespect for the rules.

 

If they are sufficiently naive not to do so, they will surely soon learn.

I don't understand this attitude at all. What makes bridge enjoyable is the opportunity to try to play better than other people. I can't see why anyone, assuming they're playing for enjoyment, would be happy to gain from the opponents' naivety about the alerting rules.

[Codo]

I would ask as defender, if I need to ask.

If the defender do not ask, I - as a declarer- would not tell him anything, why should I? I am not here to teach him my superior system and he is surely comptent enough to ask everything he needs to know. If he does not need any information, why should I start talking to him?

 

No, I do not hate him, nor the game. I respect him and his descission to stay silent.

[gwnn]

I don't know Codo, usually when I volunteer this kind of information to my opps, they are grateful (although at times they are annoyed and imply "who cares?"). So even though it is not logical that someone needs a piece of information but does not ask for it, it happens all the time. People are not rational agents, especially bridge players :)

[phil_20686]

I feel like this depends how "normal" my methods are. If I had the same auction and 4d/4h were cuebids I would not feel that I should offer an explanation. Kickback is clearly not the "standard" so I would feel like I should offer an explanation regardless of what they ask. I would say that if they do not ask they are 100% to be assuming cuebids.

 

Also, I feel like in general offering an explanation helps prevent the opps from UI'ing each other by accident.

[Trinidad]

Where I play (The Netherlands) there are no delayed alerts. (Maybe the league assumes that above 3NT people don't know what they are doing.) If opponents don't ask (which they usually do), I encourage them to do that. If they then still don't want to know what we were doing then I don't consider it my problem anymore.

 

Normally, I will not start to explain the auction unprompted. There are bridge players who genuinely dislike that. (Don't ask me why.)

 

Rik

[helene_t]

Normally, I will not start to explain the auction unprompted. There are bridge players who genuinely dislike that. (Don't ask me why.)

I have noticed it, too. I think some people take it as bragging. "Look how solid our partnership understanding is".

[Vampyr]

If it is helpful to the opponents I would like to offer them information, but I don't know what sorts of things are appropriate to tell. Kickback, OK; I play it in such rare cases that it might never come up. Anything else?

[Cyberyeti]

If it is helpful to the opponents I would like to offer them information, but I don't know what sorts of things are appropriate to tell. Kickback, OK; I play it in such rare cases that it might never come up. Anything else?

I suspect if you cue the lowest suit you don't control, or you play turbo you should probably explain them rather than opps asking a load of questions when the lead hits.

[gnasher]

If it is helpful to the opponents I would like to offer them information, but I don't know what sorts of things are appropriate to tell. Kickback, OK; I play it in such rare cases that it might never come up. Anything else?

I don't think you need to prepare for this in advance. If you've made an unusual artificial bid, you're probably waiting for the opponents to ask about it. If they don't, they're probably assuming that it's natural.

[Codo]

Why would anybody assume that a bid over 3 NT is natural? Maybe in ACOL land where you are used to quite natural bidding till the highest level?

 

But without making any statistical research, I would bet that in my world about 95 % of all bids higher then 3 NT are to play or artifical. So I would simply always ask if I can find out anything of value for my defence. Funnily all my opponents think the same way.

[helene_t]

Why would anybody assume that a bid over 3 NT is natural? Maybe in ACOL land where you are used to quite natural bidding till the highest level?

They might assume that it's natural, cuebid, gerber, response to gerber, response to blackwood. If it looks like a cuebid but is something else (say kickback) then I can see a case for a late alert.

[aguahombre]

I believe ten people have misread the poll. There were two conventional calls above 3NT. We must say something, even if just "alert", at the end of the auction.

[blackshoe]

One thing most players don't seem to know: when the opening lead is made face down, and the leader asks "any questions?" the declarer as well as the other defender is entitled to ask questions (Law 41B).

 

The OP asked us to assume a jurisdiction in which "conventional bids above 3NT must not be alerted". This is not the ACBL, although Aquahombre then referred us to 'jurisdictions where high bids are not alertable, but are defined as "delay alerts"'. He's wrong (in a minor detail, really): The ACBL, as I posted later, requires that for bids which should alerted, the alert should be delayed, so it's not a case of "don't alert", it's a case of "don't alert yet". Aqua also said that "the offer to explain (before the opening lead) consists of starting to explain". Again, as I explained in my later post, that's not what the regulation requires. IAC, the discussion of regulations in the ACBL is thread drift. So what? This is the Internet. Live with it. B-)

 

The OP is in Scotland, and gnasher has told us that in Scotland, "At the end of the auction the declaring side should draw attention to any unusual features, particularly any unusual non-alerted calls". So that's what you do there. Doesn't mean you should do it anywhere else (such as the EBU, which imposes no legal obligation to do this).

 

Most bridge players are adults. I think we should expect them to take care of themselves. They're certainly capable of asking questions if they see some call the meaning of which they are unsure. So unless the laws and regulations in force require it, I'd just keep quiet. As some have pointed out, not doing so can annoy some people. I suppose keeping quiet can annoy some people, too, but for them "why didn't you ask?" is a valid question. I'd say we might want to give a little more leeway to beginners, but that's really a separate subject IMO.

 

Just to keep the thread drift going, I should point out that in the ACBL, alertable doubles, redoubles, and passes are alerted immediately, whenever they occur. :P

 

I answered "something else" to the poll. What something else? Simple: it depends on the regulations in force.

[nige1]

In the ACBL you make a delayed alert, as explained by other posters.

In England, you have no legal obligation to say anything, but I would tell the opponents anyway.

In Scotland,

Auction Explanation. At the end of the auction the declaring side should draw attention to any unusual features, particularly any unusual non-alerted calls.

Thank you Gnasher..

Regardless of jurisdiction, I think that saying nothing is an indication that you hate either the game or your opponents.

As Gnasher points out, in such circumstances, many jurisdictions seem to insist that you at least offer to explain. In any case, I agree with Gnasher that it seems like the ethical course of action. It's a pity that the law book doesn't stipulate the Scottish rule as as a default.

[gnasher]

If you've made an unusual artificial bid, you're probably waiting for the opponents to ask about it. If they don't, they're probably assuming that it's natural.

 

Why would anybody assume that a bid over 3 NT is natural? Maybe in ACOL land where you are used to quite natural bidding till the highest level?

When I said "natural", I meant to include natural cue-bids, ie a bid that shows a control in the suit bid. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

 

But without making any statistical research, I would bet that in my world about 95 % of all bids higher then 3 NT are to play or artifical.

But I'm only talking about bids where the artificial meaning is unexpected. If there aren't any such bids in your world, my comments don't apply.

 

In my world, and in Nigel's world, nearly everybody plays the 4♦ bid in the OP as a cue-bid. If the defenders don't ask and don't look at the convention card, it's almost certain that they are incorrectly assuming that it's a cue-bid. So I tell them it's not.