Criticised for self alerting

[johnjo42]

Having played on BBO for many years I always self alert what might be an unusual conventional bid as I make it using the "alert" button.

I was recently criticised very strongly by an opponent who said that I was giving away information to the table, including, presumably to my partner.

I explained that only opponents could see the alert but she insisted that I should only alert when asked.

Is this right?

The alert she objected to was in a RKCB sequence where I responded 6C in the sequence 1S - 4S - 4NT - 6C where 6C shows 1 or 3 keycards and a void in clubs.

[sfi]

I explained that only opponents could see the alert but she insisted that I should only alert when asked.

Is this right?

No - you're right and she's wrong.

[Gerardo]

You are right: your partner can't see your explanations.

On the other hand, you explain for their benefit. If they don't want to take it, and are not coming later with "you should have explained":

 

if there is a TD, I would ask if that's allowed by regulations, and follow what the TD say.

if there is no TD, would explain partner does not see it, and if they persist, would follow the opp request. Their loss.

 

 

 

[FelicityR]

Having played on BBO for many years I always self alert what might be an unusual conventional bid as I make it using the "alert" button.

I was recently criticised very strongly by an opponent who said that I was giving away information to the table, including, presumably to my partner.

I explained that only opponents could see the alert but she insisted that I should only alert when asked.

Is this right?

The alert she objected to was in a RKCB sequence where I responded 6C in the sequence 1S - 4S - 4NT - 6C where 6C shows 1 or 3 keycards and a void in clubs.

 

From my experience I would say yes. Only alert if asked. As far as I understand - please correct me if I'm wrong other commentators - most bids over 3NT are not alertable. And whilst your partner cannot see your explanation and the opponents can, the bid is still (I presume) highlighted in yellow in the online bidding box. So, whilst not telling your partner the actual meaning of the bid, your partner would have some notion that it is conventional in some way.

[stanmaz]

Having played on BBO for many years I always self alert what might be an unusual conventional bid as I make it using the "alert" button.

I was recently criticised very strongly by an opponent who said that I was giving away information to the table, including, presumably to my partner.

I explained that only opponents could see the alert but she insisted that I should only alert when asked.

Is this right?

The alert she objected to was in a RKCB sequence where I responded 6C in the sequence 1S - 4S - 4NT - 6C where 6C shows 1 or 3 keycards and a void in clubs.

Full Disclusure belongs to the fair play. I provide to the opponents all information including lead convention. For efficient self-alerting I created and published BBOalert browser addon :

 

- Project page : https://github.com/stanmaz/BBOalert

 

BBOalert can be installed with one click :

 

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/bboalert/

 

You can join BBOalert users on Facebook :

 

https://www.facebook.com/groups/706384146770707/

 

You can reach me by mail : stanmaz.git@gmail.com

 

Using your case as example : importing in BBOalert the record

 

1S--4S--4NT--,6C,1 or 3 keycards and a void in !C

 

will automatically send the opponents the alert with the text "1 or 3 keycards and a void in !C" when the bidding sequence occurs.

[johnjo42]

From my experience I would say yes. Only alert if asked. As far as I understand - please correct me if I'm wrong other commentators - most bids over 3NT are not alertable. And whilst your partner cannot see your explanation and the opponents can, the bid is still (I presume) highlighted in yellow in the online bidding box. So, whilst not telling your partner the actual meaning of the bid, your partner would have some notion that it is conventional in some way.

Good point about bids above 3NT not being alertable. I'd overlooked that, thank you

[smerriman]

And whilst your partner cannot see your explanation and the opponents can, the bid is still (I presume) highlighted in yellow in the online bidding box. So, whilst not telling your partner the actual meaning of the bid, your partner would have some notion that it is conventional in some way.

That is incorrect; your partner just sees a normal bid.

 

Online bridge and face to face bridge are quite different; I would, for example, always describe my 4NT responses when making them (without clicking alert to mark it as artificial) just so that opps don't need to ask.

[paulg]

Good point about bids above 3NT not being alertable. I'd overlooked that, thank you

If you look at the EBU regulations for playing online matches (https://www.ebu.co.u...-match-regs.pdf) you will see that artificial calls above 3NT should be alerted.

 

9. Players should alert any calls that would be alertable or announceable in a face-to-face match, as well as calls above 3NT that are not natural. They should alert their own calls, ensuring that only their opponents and not their partners can see the alerts and explanations.

 

This is consistent with everyone else that plays online.

[gordontd]

Only alert if asked.

If you haven't alerted they won't know that they should ask.

 

Perhaps you meant "don't alert if asked not to"?

[johnjo42]

Thank you all. The consensus seems to be that I was right to alert and will continue to do so.

[Gerardo]

Good point about bids above 3NT not being alertable. I'd overlooked that, thank you

But you're supposed to alert/explain when bidding is over (if your side is declaring)

 

And this is to avoid waking partner up. If your partner doesn't know you are alerting, no need to make alerts above 3NT delayed.

[pilowsky]

I would be interested to hear from the Senior TD's about this. I haven't played for as many years as you guys, but I do play a lot. I cannot recall a penalty being awarded because of failure to alert a Jacoby transfer or to announce the meaning of a 1♣ opening or most of the other bids. Mike Lawrence writes that it's better not to ask (in the club of course) because you'll just remind opps of their system. The one time that I can recall was when my partner bid a natural 2 ♦ (my partner was new to the system) overcall of 1NT once and I alerted it as Cappalletti: majors. When dummy came down with opps in 3NT the TD was called and we were penalised 40/60. LHO later became my partner. Most of the time it seems like a game of trivial pursuit. "Shouldn't you alert that" when everyone knows perfectly well what's going on. Particularly annoying nine when the clock is running and it's eating into your thinking time for play. It reeks of a tactical manoeuvre.

What are the actual penalties in the different jurisdictions: UK, Australia, USA, Online etc

For

1) Failure to alert multi

2) Failure to alert 1 club opening

3) Failure to alert meaning of special calls eg splinters, doubles redoubles where they have non-natural meanings

4) Failure to pre-alert

5) Others that I don't know about

[paulg]

In every scenario, failure to alert an alertable call (which is defined by the authority running the event) is an infraction. There is rarely an immediate penalty, but if the opponents are damaged then they are entitled to an adjustment to restore equity.

 

The assessment that a call should have been alerted given the alerting regulations, whether the opponents were damaged, and what is equity have kept bridge newsgroups and forums in business for the last 30 years.

[mycroft]

To reiterate, because we did go off on a few tangents:

- on BBO you self alert and explain. This is visible to everybody but your partner (until the end of the hand). This is similar to screen play (except that you alert and explain to both the opponents, rather than each partner alerting and explaining to their screenmate) for exactly the same reasons.

- like screen play, some things that are "not alertable" in FTF play should be Alerted on BBO, like your 6C call. Even if they are "delayed Alerts" (ACBL) or "don't Alert" (EBU) or otherwise, that is because 'the alert is more useful to partner than the opponents', but since partner doesn't see the Alert, we do it.

 

There are a large number of new online players this month, who haven't learned how the world works - I'm expecting to see a rash of "BBO-style claims denied. repeat claim, denied. repeat..." posts as people learn that that, too, is (usually, probably not in ACBL/EBU club games) BBO standard.

 

Those of you that are old enough computer users will know of "Eternal September". Those of you that are not, but are old enough BBO users (that is, since before 2020) are about to learn.

 

Mycroft, Calgary (unfortunately), Tue Sep 9723 19:13:54 CEST 1993

 

[Edit Thu Mar 236 01:35:42 PM MDT 2020: I guess I'm not the only one with that thought.]

 

--

"You're told your opponents play SAYC, but all that means is that they can find the letters 'S', 'A', 'Y', and 'C' on their keyboard."

- Adam Beneschan, on r.g.b.

[pilowsky]

Really Good Bridge?

[dsLawsd]

Good discussion. ACBL and other events might have somewhat different alert requirements- so perhaps a tutorial or two might have value.

[RUFFJUNKIE]

Having played on BBO for many years I always self alert what might be an unusual conventional bid as I make it using the "alert" button.

I was recently criticised very strongly by an opponent who said that I was giving away information to the table, including, presumably to my partner.

I explained that only opponents could see the alert but she insisted that I should only alert when asked.

Is this right?

The alert she objected to was in a RKCB sequence where I responded 6C in the sequence 1S - 4S - 4NT - 6C where 6C shows 1 or 3 keycards and a void in clubs.

 

You are right and she is wrong, maybe she doesn't realize that partner cannot see the alert. In her defense, self alerting is something that one has to get ones head around. If you alert, partner cant see, and opps have the choice of looking at the alert.

[paulg]

Tutorial #1: ignore the regulations and just tell 'em what you play

[Vampyr]

Tutorial #1: ignore the regulations and just tell 'em what you play

 

Is it really necessary to undermine all the good advice that has been given here? Yes of course you can explain every bid, and it is not a bad idea. But you should also obey the alert/announce regulations of the relevant jurisdiction.

 

What is a “delayed alert”?

[paulg]

What is a "delayed alert"?

A delayed alert is an ACBL artefact by which you do not alert most calls above 3NT, but at the end of the auction you do.

 

It is designed primarily to prevent UI at a level where the lack of an alert is unlikely to damage the opponents.

 

The EBU has a similar rule of not alerting most actions above 3NT but there is no obligation on the side making artificial bids to alert their opponents to them at the end of the auction.

 

Online and with screens these rules typically do not apply and you should alert them, as has been discussed.

[aawk]

From my experience I would say yes. Only alert if asked. As far as I understand - please correct me if I'm wrong other commentators - most bids over 3NT are not alertable. And whilst your partner cannot see your explanation and the opponents can, the bid is still (I presume) highlighted in yellow in the online bidding box. So, whilst not telling your partner the actual meaning of the bid, your partner would have some notion that it is conventional in some way.

 

Bids above 3nt should be alerted in the first bidding round. For example 1♠ - 4x being a splinter must be alerted, 1♠ - 3♠ - 4x being a cue bid not. But it could be that are different rule for different zones.

[stuohy]

Also, in timed events, it wastes a LOT of time to just click the alert button with no text. A simple explanation should be included: "denies spades" ... not a reference like "4 piece Drury".

[steve2005]

That is incorrect; your partner just sees a normal bid.

 

Online bridge and face to face bridge are quite different; I would, for example, always describe my 4NT responses when making them (without clicking alert to mark it as artificial) just so that opps don't need to ask.

your partner has no idea you have alerted. The bid is not highlighted to everyone until you look at the hand when finished in history.

[dalelpage]

Full Disclusure belongs to the fair play. I provide to the opponents all information including lead convention. For efficient self-alerting I created and published BBOalert browser addon :

 

- Project page : https://github.com/stanmaz/BBOalert

 

BBOalert can be installed with one click :

 

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/bboalert/

 

You can join BBOalert users on Facebook :

 

https://www.facebook.com/groups/706384146770707/

 

You can reach me by mail : stanmaz.git@gmail.com

 

Using your case as example : importing in BBOalert the record

 

1S--4S--4NT--,6C,1 or 3 keycards and a void in !C

 

will automatically send the opponents the alert with the text "1 or 3 keycards and a void in !C" when the bidding sequence occurs.

 

Is this extension available only for Firefox? I would love to install it, but I prefer Chrome or IE over Firefox. Personal preference.

 

Thanks,

 

Dale

[kuhchung]

In my opinion this is one of the worst failings of the BBO UI. Yes, users should read the site rules and be expected to understand how self alerting works, but the fact that this complaint comes up OVER and OVER suggests that BBO should just be preemptive about telling their stupid idiot users that self alerting is NOT cheating and is only for their benefit.