nige1 Posted October 15, 2018 Report Share Posted October 15, 2018 Consider these auctions...2♦ (Pass) 2♥ (Double)...2♦ (Pass) 2♠ (Double)...where...2♦ = Weak 2 in a major (5-9 HCP).2♥/♠ = Pass or correct.Double = Takeout of the suit bid.Under EBU regulations...Is the 2♥ reply alertable?Is the 2♠ reply alertable?Is the double alertable?Are these regulations logical? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulg Posted October 15, 2018 Report Share Posted October 15, 2018 Nigel A quick search of the Blue Book for 'pass or correct' soon finds the answers. 4 H 1 Because they are not natural, players must alert (unless excepted by 4B4 above):[c] Any 'pass or correct' bids 4 H 5 The following doubles must not be alerted:[c] A take-out double of a 'pass-or-correct' bid such as 2♦ Multi – pass – 2♠ – dbl since this is deemed to show the suit bid. These seem consistent with the EBU regulations and, as such, logical. More importantly, they are explicitly covered in the regulations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pescetom Posted October 15, 2018 Report Share Posted October 15, 2018 I take it for granted that the regulations are as quoted.4. I don't find it logical that a takeout of a pass or correct bid should show the suit bid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyberyeti Posted October 15, 2018 Report Share Posted October 15, 2018 I have less of a problem with the regs on these auctions but say 1N-X-XX-P-2♣ where responder has shown a 5 card suit and clubs is 1 in 4 to be their suit rather than 1 in 2 it seems odd to treat it as natural until responder passes it, but it is at least clear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lamford Posted October 16, 2018 Report Share Posted October 16, 2018 Am I bovvered Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted October 16, 2018 Report Share Posted October 16, 2018 It is arguably a bit inconsistent that P/C bids are alertable but nevertheless treated as natural for the purpose of alerting of a double of a P/C bids. Nevertheless, the regulations are what I would prefer them to be. In practice, I don't think many people draw conclusions from opps' alert or lack of alert of a P/C bid. You rarely need to know what it means (during the auction, that is) but if you do, you can always ask. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve2005 Posted October 16, 2018 Report Share Posted October 16, 2018 In ACBL they are also alertable as they are a non-forcing bid after a opening 2-bid.I don't know if the other EBU things apply to ACBL but as they are artificial I would assume so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tramticket Posted October 16, 2018 Report Share Posted October 16, 2018 The first two seem logical. I am surprised by the third - but in practice I would always ask if opps doubles our P/C response to the multi as the double can have a large variety of meanings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pescetom Posted October 16, 2018 Report Share Posted October 16, 2018 4 H 5 The following doubles must not be alerted:[c] A take-out double of a 'pass-or-correct' bid such as 2♦ Multi – pass – 2♠ – dbl since this is deemed to show the suit bid.It dawns on me that "this is" maybe refers to the p/c bid and not to the t/o double as I first read it. As we are "deeming" something we know to be untrue I would still consider the double highly unusual. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gordontd Posted October 16, 2018 Report Share Posted October 16, 2018 It dawns on me that "this is" maybe refers to the p/c bid and not to the t/o double as I first read it. As we are "deeming" something we know to be untrue I would still consider the double highly unusual.The point about pass or correct bids is that they might end the auction. That's why takeout is the default meaning of a double of them. If Nigel intended the poll to promote his idea that regulations are complicated, poorly understood and inconsistently implemented, the results of this poll so far don't seem to show that. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tramticket Posted October 16, 2018 Report Share Posted October 16, 2018 If Nigel intended the poll to promote his idea that regulations are complicated, poorly understood and inconsistently implemented, the results of this poll so far don't seem to show that. To be fair to Nigel, I would have got the third one wrong at the table. I was only able to get the correct result by reading the blue book and it does feel inconsistent with the first two. I also regularly alert the 2♣ bid in Cyberyeti's example, so I guess that I haven't understood that one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barmar Posted October 16, 2018 Report Share Posted October 16, 2018 It dawns on me that "this is" maybe refers to the p/c bid and not to the t/o double as I first read it. As we are "deeming" something we know to be untrue I would still consider the double highly unusual.That's how I interpreted it as well. A double that shows the suit bid is not considered a takeout double, so the rule would be contradicting itself under your initial interpretation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nige1 Posted October 16, 2018 Author Report Share Posted October 16, 2018 The point about pass or correct bids is that they might end the auction. That's why takeout is the default meaning of a double of them.Lots of artificial bids "might end the auction". Cyberyeti gives an example. If Nigel intended the poll to promote his idea that regulations are complicated, poorly understood and inconsistently implemented, the results of this poll so far don't seem to show that. Fair enough. That so many knew the answer to 3rd question came as a relief and a surprise.:) I confess that I didn't know until Gordon told me :( Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pescetom Posted October 16, 2018 Report Share Posted October 16, 2018 Lots of artificial bids "might end the auction".That's true, but I imagine that Gordon's point is that the fact that the pass/correct bid might end the auction testifies that it is probably the suit which opener really holds. There is an analogy with a transfer here, in that double of the completion of a transfer would normally (I think) be takeout, even though the completion was artificial and opener might be short in the suit. Although in that case the EBU doesn't (I believe) alert the artificial bid.I'm half convinced B-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barmar Posted October 17, 2018 Report Share Posted October 17, 2018 That's true, but I imagine that Gordon's point is that the fact that the pass/correct bid might end the auction testifies that it is probably the suit which opener really holds. There is an analogy with a transfer here, in that double of the completion of a transfer would normally (I think) be takeout, even though the completion was artificial and opener might be short in the suit. Although in that case the EBU doesn't (I believe) alert the artificial bid.I'm half convinced B-)In the case of a transfer, the opponents are "known" to have at least a 7-card fit, so it's unlikely to be a place that your side wants to play, and takeout is logical. That's not the case for pass/correct bids. I think players have simply found that treating it as natural works out better in the long run, so the double should be takeout, and regulators have put their stamp on this as the "normal" meaning that's not alertable. And it doesn't hurt that it's consistent with most other low-level doubles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyberyeti Posted October 17, 2018 Report Share Posted October 17, 2018 In the case of a transfer, the opponents are "known" to have at least a 7-card fit, so it's unlikely to be a place that your side wants to play, and takeout is logical. Nitpick: you're known to hold 6, opening a "natural" 1N with a singleton is legal (and announceable) here Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barmar Posted October 17, 2018 Report Share Posted October 17, 2018 Nitpick: you're known to hold 6, opening a "natural" 1N with a singleton is legal (and announceable) hereThat's why I put it in quotes, nothing is guaranteed. Maybe "presumed" would have been a better word -- even though opener might have a singleton, it's not likely for most pairs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pescetom Posted October 17, 2018 Report Share Posted October 17, 2018 In the case of a transfer, the opponents are "known" to have at least a 7-card fit, so it's unlikely to be a place that your side wants to play, and takeout is logical. That's not the case for pass/correct bids. True, but there is still some analogy I think.After a multi pass/correct bid they are not "known" to have a 7+card fit in the bid suit, but it's fairly likely - and if not, you are probably looking at the same suit in your own hand, with no reason to takeout anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tramticket Posted October 17, 2018 Report Share Posted October 17, 2018 True, but there is still some analogy I think.After a multi pass/correct bid they are not "known" to have a 7+card fit in the bid suit, but it's fairly likely - and if not, you are probably looking at the same suit in your own hand, with no reason to takeout anyway.Just as likely to have a three-card "fit" in my experience. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pescetom Posted October 17, 2018 Report Share Posted October 17, 2018 Just as likely to have a three-card "fit" in my experience. you are probably looking at the same suit in your own hand, with no reason to takeout anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vampyr Posted October 19, 2018 Report Share Posted October 19, 2018 True, but there is still some analogy I think.After a multi pass/correct bid they are not "known" to have a 7+card fit in the bid suit, but it's fairly likely - and if not, you are probably looking at the same suit in your own hand, with no reason to takeout anyway. No, but you may wish to do something. My regular partner and I play that doubles of pass-or-correct bids are takeout or penalty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barmar Posted October 19, 2018 Report Share Posted October 19, 2018 No, but you may wish to do something. My regular partner and I play that doubles of pass-or-correct bids are takeout or penalty.What does that mean? Look at your hand and try to guess whether partner is likely to be short or long in the suit? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyberyeti Posted October 19, 2018 Report Share Posted October 19, 2018 What does that mean? Look at your hand and try to guess whether partner is likely to be short or long in the suit? That's what it means, but it's usually closer to "how many times I cough will tell you" or similar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pescetom Posted October 19, 2018 Report Share Posted October 19, 2018 That's what it means, but it's usually closer to "how many times I cough will tell you" or similar. Besides the danger of miscounting coughs (or forgetting whether you agreed to play PETO or POTE), there is also some risk due to the possible strong variant(s) of opponents' Multi: if opener vulnerable could hold 25 HCP balanced or even "just" a strong three-suiter with AKQx in the pass-or-correct suit then things might get tricky here. 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.