[JustTosh]

Hi.

What are the alert rule in this situation. 1c - (1h) - dbl?

99% of bridge players show a 4 card spade when they double. I once had a pd who wanted to use dbl in this situation as penalty.

Question:
1. Should I alert the normal neg double as it doesn't show hearts?
2. Or should I alert the penalty double as that's really very rare?

Tom

[campboy]

Alerting rules vary from country to country. Where I am (England) the penalty double is alertable and the takeout double is not. Under ACBL rules only "doubles with highly unusual or unexpected meanings" are alerted, so the takeout double certainly should not be. The examples given of highly unusual doubles are more unusual than playing a penalty double here, so it's not clear to me whether the penalty double requires an alert, but it can't hurt to alert it and your opponents will probably appreciate it.

[mcphee]

Welcome to revisiting the stone age. I do believe in ACBL land low level penalty doubles are an alert. In this age it might be best to show your partner the value of the negative double, the NT range after the over call and the advantages. Low level penalty doubles are not a winner.

[Quantumcat]

Where I come from, no double is ever alerted, no matter what it means. Same as bids of the opponents' suit.

[the hog]

JustTosh, on 2012-August-21, 02:31, said:

Hi.

What are the alert rule in this situation. 1c - (1h) - dbl?

99% of bridge players show a 4 card spade when they double. I once had a pd who wanted to use dbl in this situation as penalty.

Question:
1. Should I alert the normal neg double as it doesn't show hearts?
2. Or should I alert the penalty double as that's really very rare?

Tom

"99% of bridge players show a 4 card spade when they double"
99% ? Really, I don't think so.

[the hog]

JustTosh, on 2012-August-21, 02:31, said:

Hi.

What are the alert rule in this situation. 1c - (1h) - dbl?

99% of bridge players show a 4 card spade when they double. I once had a pd who wanted to use dbl in this situation as penalty.

Question:
1. Should I alert the normal neg double as it doesn't show hearts?
2. Or should I alert the penalty double as that's really very rare?

Tom

"99% of bridge players show a 4 card spade when they double"
99% ? Really, I don't think so.

[Vampyr]

Quantumcat, on 2012-August-21, 17:33, said:

Where I come from, no double is ever alerted, no matter what it means.

Sounds nightmareish.

[Quantumcat]

Opponents are expected to ask, if they want to know - same as bids of the opponent's suit, 2C openings, and 2C response to 1NT.

[fromageGB]

Vampyr, on 2012-August-21, 18:36, said:

Sounds nightmareish.

On the contrary, I think the EBU regulation is much more nightmarish.

Playing in England I often come across doubles alerted when they shouldn't be, or not alerted when they should. Am I supposed to take the regulation inference, and get a bad score when the double wasn't meant that way? If I call the director he will say I had the opportunity to ask and failed to do so. No, I ask all the time if I am uncertain of the player's methods.

I think the idea of not alerting (always) is better, or a regulation that makes sense and everyone can remember, such as "alert if it is not penalty or an expectation that the contract is failing". Better still if you you had announcements, so that alerter's partner can say "takeout", "shows spades" "penalty" "lead directing" or whatever describes it.

[TMorris]

I agree, I think it was a shame that the Club Committee voted against having no alerts for any doubles. We have had alerts for (broadly) non-t/o doubles at low levels for some time now and at the club I always get questions every time I alert my partners penalty double.

[aguahombre]

For specifically the case of the 1♥ overcall, what is required - should be required - and is actually practiced in ACBL, EBU and other jurisdictions is a subject worthy of exploring. It is not simple, and is quite dependent on agreements.

But not here in N/B. One big problem at N/B/I is awareness. If you know your methods regarding penalty and take-out doubles at the low levels of an auction are not what the vast majority of players would play, then you will alert them. But, if you knew that, you probably would know enough to change your methods.

The sticklers will say that ignorance of the rules is no excuse. But this is ridiculous to apply if you don't know what is highly unexpected and what is not.

[Vampyr]

fromageGB, on 2012-August-22, 06:44, said:

Playing in England I often come across doubles alerted when they shouldn't be, or not alerted when they should. Am I supposed to take the regulation inference, and get a bad score when the double wasn't meant that way? If I call the director he will say I had the opportunity to ask and failed to do so. No, I ask all the time if I am uncertain of the player's methods.

Alerts in this case allow a person not to have to ask about a non-alerted double. Your directors have given you incorrect rulings.

[Vampyr]

TMorris, on 2012-August-22, 11:15, said:

I agree, I think it was a shame that the Club Committee voted against having no alerts for any doubles. We have had alerts for (broadly) non-t/o doubles at low levels for some time now and at the club I always get questions every time I alert my partners penalty double.

Do you really find it that onerous?

[Quantumcat]

fromageGB, on 2012-August-22, 06:44, said:

Better still if you you had announcements, so that alerter's partner can say "takeout", "shows spades" "penalty" "lead directing" or whatever describes it.

It's announcements that give me nightmares! In my own opinion, announcements are not bridge (not dissing any countries that do this, they can do whatever they want, only expressing an opinion). You're not supposed to tell each other what you interpret each other's bids as - doesn't a Law say somewhere that the only information conveyed between partners may be with the cards played and the bids made? Aside from the UI problems, if you make an announcement at an unauthorised time you would be guilty of severe table talk and would get into big trouble!

[aguahombre]

Quantumcat, on 2012-August-22, 18:38, said:

It's announcements that give me nightmares! In my own opinion, announcements are not bridge (not dissing any countries that do this, they can do whatever they want, only expressing an opinion). You're not supposed to tell each other what you interpret each other's bids as - doesn't a Law say somewhere that the only information conveyed between partners may be with the cards played and the bids made? Aside from the UI problems, if you make an announcement at an unauthorised time you would be guilty of severe table talk and would get into big trouble!

Extending announcements beyond what they are now in ACBL (1♣ could be short, and simple transfers to majors over NT) would, IMO, also...create nightmares. I am willing to accept the occasional help those simple ones might give to a really bad pair who might forget those basic things, and gain from the expedience of announcing. Announcing the nature of doubles is horrible.

[Vampyr]

aguahombre, on 2012-August-22, 19:11, said:

Announcing the nature of doubles is horrible.

I agree. I think we have it absolutely correct here in the EBU, but of course you can't please everybody.

[gordontd]

TMorris, on 2012-August-22, 11:15, said:

We have had alerts for (broadly) non-t/o doubles at low levels for some time now and at the club I always get questions every time I alert my partners penalty double.

Sounds like it's working as it should. You've told them with your alert that it's not a takeout double, and they ask you to explain exactly what it is.

[Quantumcat]

aguahombre, on 2012-August-22, 19:11, said:

...what they are now in ACBL (1♣ could be short, and simple transfers to majors over NT)...

Isn't that was the CC is for? Here in Aus the top quarter of the first page of the standard CC contains suit opening minimum lengths and HCP, and 1NT range and meanings for 2C/2D/2H/2S/2NT responses. What does the US standard CC have on it?

[blackshoe]

Quantumcat, on 2012-August-22, 18:38, said:

It's announcements that give me nightmares! In my own opinion, announcements are not bridge (not dissing any countries that do this, they can do whatever they want, only expressing an opinion). You're not supposed to tell each other what you interpret each other's bids as - doesn't a Law say somewhere that the only information conveyed between partners may be with the cards played and the bids made? Aside from the UI problems, if you make an announcement at an unauthorised time you would be guilty of severe table talk and would get into big trouble!

In the ACBL, at least, what's announced and how you announce it are very specific. And you announce per your agreements, just like you alert per your agreements, not "what you interpret each other's bids as".

aguahombre, on 2012-August-22, 19:11, said:

Extending announcements beyond what they are now in ACBL (1♣ could be short, and simple transfers to majors over NT) would, IMO, also...create nightmares. I am willing to accept the occasional help those simple ones might give to a really bad pair who might forget those basic things, and gain from the expedience of announcing. Announcing the nature of doubles is horrible.

There are four announcement in the ACBL. You left out "forcing" or "semi-forcing" for a forcing or semi-forcing 1NT response to 1M and "15-17" or whatever the agreed range is for 1NT opening bids.

I don't much like the idea of announcing the agreed meaning of doubles, either.

[aguahombre]

blackshoe, on 2012-August-23, 07:10, said:

There are four announcement in the ACBL. You left out "forcing" or "semi-forcing" for a forcing or semi-forcing 1NT response to 1M and "15-17" or whatever the agreed range is for 1NT opening bids.

I don't much like the idea of announcing the agreed meaning of doubles, either.

Yep, sloppy of me to cut the list short. Those two announcements are expedient, and acceptable IMO, as well.