When to self alert during a Jacoby xfer

[rvpasquale]

I was wondering which player should self alert during a Jacoby transfer?

 

Example: 1NT then 2D then 2H....

 

Should it be the 2D bidder (who starts the xfer) or the 2H bidder (who completes the xfer)?

 

Thanks.

[johnu]

The 2♦ bidder should self alert that bid. After the transfer bid has been self alerted (with explanation), there is no need to alert opener's acceptance of the transfer. If you have agreements for opener bypassing the transfer to make a super accept, those bids should be self alerted.

[Vampyr]

The 2♦ bidder should self alert that bid. After the transfer bid has been self alerted (with explanation), there is no need to alert opener's acceptance of the transfer. If you have agreements for opener bypassing the transfer to make a super accept, those bids should be self alerted.

 

Or if a simple accept denies 4-cards. That should be alerted.

[jcm12]

Or if a simple accept denies 4-cards. That should be alerted.

 

I don't think simple accept denying 4 cards is alertable now under ACBL rules. Is it different here?

[Trinidad]

I don't think simple accept denying 4 cards is alertable now under ACBL rules. Is it different here?

In a way it is different here. In face to face bridge, every alert gives information to partner. This is an unwanted effect of the alert procedure. That is an important reason for regulators to limit the alertability of agreements.

 

At Bridgebase, your partner will not see your alerts and explanations. The unwanted side effect does not exist. Active ethics and discloure are important. It is actively ethical to simply type in "<4♥" or "denies (MAX + 4♥)". And it is not hard to do.

 

Rik

[Povratnik]

The 2♦ bidder should self alert that bid. After the transfer bid has been self alerted (with explanation), there is no need to alert opener's acceptance of the transfer.

At Bridgebase, your partner will not see your alerts and explanations.

How the opener could know that the transfer bid has been self alerted?

[barmar]

How the opener could know that the transfer bid has been self alerted?

Why do they need to know?

[Vampyr]

Why do they need to know?

 

It is better, of course, that they do not know. Hiding alerts, announcements and explanations from partner is an advantage of BBO vs normal bridge. It is better, in fact, than screens, since opponents on opposite sides of the screen do not get different explanations.

[Povratnik]

Why do they need to know?

To be freed from the obligation to alert. If they don't know, why shouldn't they alert? If I am bidding 2♥ with possible doubleton, opponents have right to know that, do they?

[barmar]

To be freed from the obligation to alert. If they don't know, why shouldn't they alert? If I am bidding 2♥ with possible doubleton, opponents have right to know that, do they?

The opponents should be informed of your agreements, not what you actually hold. If you're playing transfers, you alert the transfer.

[Povratnik]

The opponents should be informed of your agreements, not what you actually hold. If you're playing transfers, you alert the transfer.

Of course. As long as we are talking about normal bridge, which was NOT the case with me. I assumed that we're talking about typical BBO tournaments...

 

- there wasn't any conversation about systems and agreements

- nobody looked at anybody's convention card

- very frequently, there is no agreements at all (random partnerships for one session)

and not really relevant for this very conversation, but should be kept in mind for possible further developments of discussion:

- in huge percentage of cases, pairs (and even players in the pair) are from different jurisdictions and players generally aren't sure what they should alert

 

But Jacoby transfers aren't suitable example for discussion about these principles, because EVERYBODY assumes them and NOBODY alerts them...

[rvpasquale]

Thank you for all the great posts and explanations! I appreciate it.

[pilowsky]

On the other hand the Fora are a great place for discussing it because people argue about silly and unnecessary things endlessly here. Try calling the director. Just like at the club - you'll get nowhere fast, but if you want to slow things down and you are really worried, you can always ask before you bid. Mike Lawrence advises people to never ask on the grounds that you will only remind them of their system.

[fromageGB]

This has been bugging me, too. When looking later at previously played hands I once noticed that my partner failed to alert one of his bids. I gave the correct system reply with no alert. I know this is "correct" in that opponents can call a director if they feel they have been damaged at the end of the hand, but (a) few people would, (b) there is not sufficient time given to look at a hand to even notice it, before the hand is whisked away to be replaced by the next hand, and © it goes against the spirit of the relaxed game it was intended to be.

 

My preference would be swing the other way : allow a self alert for any conventional reply which is not bog-standard, and let opponents call the director for unauthorised information if my partner has failed to alert.

 

An alternative would be to have all the bidding with alerts shown, presented before play, so that players can see it and ask questions, with that display giving way to the opening lead only when every player has pressed OK.

[barmar]

Since partner doesn't see your alerts, there's no harm in over-alerting, except that it slows things down while you're typing.

[dave1hall]

This is a great topic and has been very informative.

 

I respectfully disagree with not alerting Transfers. The ACBL convention card shows a blue line for “announce” and a red linefor “alerts”. I plan to "alert" both thered and blue line bids. I do not think there is a place to "announce" a bid. A common exampleis playing 1 NT forcing. Some play itover interference, others do not. Comments?

 

I really like not having to worry aboutpartner’s alert.

 

As for typing time, I have some common “chat”messages open on an adjacent screen. Isimply copy and paste. It should workfor common alerts.

 

With one screen, simply downsize both BBO anda Word screen to prevent the BBO from disappearing when you move the cursor tothe other window.

 

I have not played BBO for many years and like a lot of "Virus Bridge Players", may be weak on the rules and intentions.

 

Dave

 

 

 

[Vampyr]

This is a great topic and has been very informative.

 

I respectfully disagree with not alerting Transfers. The ACBL convention card shows a blue line for “announce” and a red linefor “alerts”. I plan to "alert" both thered and blue line bids. I do not think there is a place to "announce" a bid. A common exampleis playing 1 NT forcing. Some play itover interference, others do not. Comments?

 

I think that if you are playing in an ACBL competition you should follow their guidelines. So if the regulation says to announce (explain) then do that.

[barmar]

My preference would be swing the other way : allow a self alert for any conventional reply which is not bog-standard, and let opponents call the director for unauthorised information if my partner has failed to alert.

There's no UI from alerting or not alerting, since partner doesn't see your alerts. Did you mean misinformation?

[barmar]

I respectfully disagree with not alerting Transfers.

Who are you disagreeing with? I don't think anyone has suggested not alerting them, although someone said that many people don't and it's not usually a problem (since practically everyone plays them).

[pescetom]

Since partner doesn't see your alerts, there's no harm in over-alerting, except that it slows things down while you're typing.

 

Is partner's alert truly invisible to me, or do I see his bid as alerted (surrounded by rectangle) but not the explanation?

I don't play with a regular partner on BBO so never figured this out.

[sfi]

It's invisible to you during the hand. You can see the alerts when looking at the hand history.

[dave1hall]

I found a great video on the BBO alerts on Youtube

 

seems to fit this discussion