[mghatiya]

Me and my partner do not play transfers. So 1NT - P - 2H is a natural call.

We played the same today and were told by our opponents and director that it should be alerted.

Doesn't sound right to me though.

Have laws changed? Does one need to alert for such natural bids and not for the universally used conventions like transfer, stayman etc?

If yes, why has it so happened? And how does one figure out what to alert and what not to in such cases?

[Cyberyeti]

Strongly suspect this depends where the hand occurred, here in the UK you would announce a transfer, alert something that was neither natural nor a transfer and say nothing for a wto, but that may vary elsewhere.

[WellSpyder]

Our legal experts need to know where you play before answering questions like this since the answer will depend on local regulations.

[mgoetze]

 mghatiya, on 2015-December-17, 11:10, said:

Have laws changed?

This has never been a matter of law, and always been one of regulation. Unfortunately it's not clear from your post which regulations are applicable.

[steve2005]

Lets see. In ACBL you announce transfers and alert artificial meanings for 2♦, 2♥ and 2♠. So your supposed to alert natural 2♦, 2♥ and 2♠.
I don't think so. What your basically saying is you have to alert or announce all bids which completely defeats the purpose of alerting.

[nige1]

Local players are usually familiar with local methods, but straight-forward, accurate disclosure is essential by/for strangers/foreigners. Hence disclosure-rules (alerting,/announcing /system-cards/whatever) should be global (even if local legislators insist on retaining control of local system-regulation).

[Vampyr]

 nige1, on 2015-December-17, 18:31, said:

Local players are usually familiar with local methods, but straight-forward, accurate disclosure is essential by/for strangers/foreigners. Hence disclosure-rules (alerting,/announcing /system-cards/whatever) should be global (even if local legislators insist on retaining control of local system-regulation).

I don't think the OP is asking the question WRT upcoming international travel. He just wants to know his local regulation.

Anyway, Nigel, most of us have had good experiences with international play. It seems that only you and, IIRC, aqua hombre who have not. It seems a pity that the world should have to adopt ACBL regulations to suit two people.

[nige1]

 Vampyr, on 2015-December-18, 04:18, said:

I don't think the OP is asking the question WRT upcoming international travel. He just wants to know his local regulation. Anyway, Nigel, most of us have had good experiences with international play. It seems that only you and, IIRC, aqua hombre who have not. It seems a pity that the world should have to adopt ACBL regulations to suit two people.

I'll take Vampyrs word about disclosure at international level. Our main concern should be for foreigners in our events, who find it hard to find out opponents methods or to disclose their own. IMO, simple global disclosure rules shouldn't pander to ACBL system-regulations or to any other kind of chauvinism.

[mghatiya]

Thanks all for the replies.

This happened in Bangalore, India. And I am not stranger/foreigner in this field.

Thanks for pointing the difference between law and regulation. I think I should read that up a bit.

To share the context: A good majority of people in our locale do play transfer. A minority percentage don't. So far in the plays I have seen people alerting for transfers, barring some casual scenarios where people just assume the transfer and bidder goes lazy and anyway most of the times the subsequent bid of the opener confirms whether it is transfer or not.

If it is a regulation question, then I have following questions:

1) If "transfer" is a well accepted as 'norm' in my locale, is it okay to not alert it and does it demand the natural bid to be alerted? How about other well accepted bids like stayman?

2) Even if it is a regulation and not law, there has to be some guiding principle. Is the principle that "If you bid anything other than usual norm of the group, whether it is natural or not, you better alert it"?

3) Can regulations differ by locale? Shouldn't there be a universal set of regulations/principles? Surely in a sport with set international standards, one can't make local regulations to suit their needs? If it is a serious affair, standards need to be there. People can relax the standards a bit possibly, but not change (if the body is serious about international participation etc). I hope I was able to point the difference of "relaxation" and "changing". Not forcing people to alert artificial bids is "relaxation". Forcing people to alert natural bids is "changing".

[aguahombre]

 Vampyr, on 2015-December-18, 04:18, said:

I don't think the OP is asking the question WRT upcoming international travel. He just wants to know his local regulation.

Anyway, Nigel, most of us have had good experiences with international play. It seems that only you and, IIRC, aqua hombre who have not. It seems a pity that the world should have to adopt ACBL regulations to suit two people.

You bring me into this with something untrue. A long time ago, I anticipated problems for visitors trying to cope with disclosure/alerts in a jurisdiction where there are just a list of do's and don'ts without consistent theme or reason. It was a poll you, yourself, started on whether alert policy should be global -- and I stated why I would prefer a more standardized set of rules. I fully understand why locals would want to keep their own parochial rules.

I never said I had bad experience with it in the past, because I have yet to have the pleasure of traveling to your adopted homeland, and I have yet to have ANY bad experience with British visitors to the U.S. on disclosure or anything else. I simply believe it is a lot easier for British visitors to handle U.S. regulations than vice versa because there is less pure rote memory involved.

[barmar]

 mghatiya, on 2015-December-18, 09:11, said:

1) If "transfer" is a well accepted as 'norm' in my locale, is it okay to not alert it and does it demand the natural bid to be alerted? How about other well accepted bids like stayman?

You need to consult your local alerting regulations. In America and England, transfers are announced, not alerted. Each jurisdiction makes their own regulations.

Quote

2) Even if it is a regulation and not law, there has to be some guiding principle. Is the principle that "If you bid anything other than usual norm of the group, whether it is natural or not, you better alert it"?

DIfferent juridictions use different guiding principles. EBU used to have a very simple alerting rule: alert everything that's artificial. A few years ago they changed to a system that's more like ACBL's, where alerts are used mostly for unusual meanings, and announcements are used for some common conventions.

Quote

3) Can regulations differ by locale? Shouldn't there be a universal set of regulations/principles?

That's the whole difference between the Laws and Regulations. The Laws are world-wide, regulations are set by the organizations hosting the tournament.
The Law relevant to which calls may require alerting (40B1a) just says:

Quote

In its discretion the Regulating Authority may designate certain partnership understandings as “special partnership understandings”. A special partnership understanding is one whose meaning, in the opinion of the Regulating Authority, may not be readily understood and anticipated by a significant number of players in the tournament.

For instance, in the US, most players are not familiar with the Polish Club system. But in Poland, that's probably not the case. So it makes sense to have different alerting requirements for conventions that are part of this system, depending on the locale.

[barmar]

I tried finding alerting regulations on the website for the Bridge Federation of India, but couldn't. I suggest you ask a tournament director where these regulations are.

[Zelandakh]

 mghatiya, on 2015-December-18, 09:11, said:

1) If "transfer" is a well accepted as 'norm' in my locale, is it okay to not alert it and does it demand the natural bid to be alerted? How about other well accepted bids like stayman?

2) Even if it is a regulation and not law, there has to be some guiding principle. Is the principle that "If you bid anything other than usual norm of the group, whether it is natural or not, you better alert it"?

3) Can regulations differ by locale? Shouldn't there be a universal set of regulations/principles? Surely in a sport with set international standards, one can't make local regulations to suit their needs? If it is a serious affair, standards need to be there. People can relax the standards a bit possibly, but not change (if the body is serious about international participation etc). I hope I was able to point the difference of "relaxation" and "changing". Not forcing people to alert artificial bids is "relaxation". Forcing people to alert natural bids is "changing".

1. It is irrelevant whether transfers are common or uncommon in the area as to whether they are alerted. What matters are the regulations in force. You should probably go to the website of your local regulating authority and find the relevant document. The only one I could find in English referred to the EBU regulations, which have already been mentioned in this thread.

2. Different authorities base their regulations on differing principles. It is not uncommon for such regulations to dictate that anything "unusual" should be alerted but this is not universal.

3. Yes, regulations do differ between regulating authorities. Some, such as Nige, agree with you very strongly that it would be best if there was a universal set of regulations; some others here believe that regulations that best suit the local player base is a better way. If you were playing in Poland and every pair had to alert every bid they made just because the national bidding system is less widely used internationally, would that seem sensible? Another classic example is the auction 1NT - (P) - 2♣. Is it helpful when every pair has to alert this? Would you take the time to ask every time only to hear "Stayman" as the reply in every round? Of course, just when you stop bothering to ask you bump into a player that uses 2♣ for something else - maybe it would have been useful to know that.

The truth is that system regulation is a difficult area and the requirements for local games are often quite different from international events. It is a good idea to familiarize yourself with your local regulations though, so my suggestion to you would be to start with that.

[campboy]

 nige1, on 2015-December-18, 06:12, said:

Our main concern should be for foreigners in our events, who find it hard to find out opponents methods or to disclose their own.

I disagree with this. International visitors are few in number, and are usually experienced players who can be expected to cope. But an inappropriate set of alerting regulations is going to cause problems for the much larger number of novice players in clubs, and, potentially, put them off the game entirely. These are the people we should be concerned about. And that is one reason why alerting regulations vary from country to country -- because what is unexpected to that group of players also varies.

[sfi]

 campboy, on 2015-December-18, 10:58, said:

I disagree with this. International visitors are few in number, and are usually experienced players who can be expected to cope. But an inappropriate set of alerting regulations is going to cause problems for the much larger number of novice players in clubs, and, potentially, put them off the game entirely. These are the people we should be concerned about. And that is one reason why alerting regulations vary from country to country -- because what is unexpected to that group of players also varies.

Agreed. It is pretty simple to talk to a director and get a quick rundown on what is alertable and/or announcaeble before you start play in a new country. Given the differences around the world, it's expected and even desirable to have regulations differ.

[mghatiya]

Thanks all.

Problem is that I have seen different directors telling me different things. I don't think there are any well documented local regulations.

So ultimately mere players like me are left to do the guessing.

[RMB1]

 mghatiya, on 2015-December-18, 22:23, said:

Problem is that I have seen different directors telling me different things.
I don't think there are any well documented local regulations.
So ultimately mere players like me are left to do the guessing.

It appears that the local regulations are in practice defined by the directors.
Avoid guessing: at each new club, new tournament, new director, ask the director in advance.

[blackshoe]

And get it in writing, or he'll change his mind in mid-tournament.

[steve2005]

I liked it long ago when you didn't have to alert Strong or Acol 2's in ACBL
Playing against a pair who preyed on little old ladies and came into auctions on air knowing they wouldn't dare double them.
So I opened an Acol 2D they stepped in and partner hammered them.

[Vampyr]

 steve2005, on 2015-December-22, 20:28, said:

I liked it long ago when you didn't have to alert Strong or Acol 2's in ACBL
Playing against a pair who preyed on little old ladies and came into auctions on air knowing they wouldn't dare double them.
So I opened an Acol 2D they stepped in and partner hammered them.

What difference did the alert/announcement status make?