[Ranmit]

As in the title - you are on your way to pick the alert card for your partner's bid, but your RHO already makes a bid before you can alert. You alert after the bid. What happens now? If opponent is allowed to change their bid, that gives UI to their partner?

Does it come down to whether you had 'reasonable time' to alert but delayed it vs whether RHO actually bid too early to allow you to alert?

[blackshoe]

I would go ahead and alert. If RHO tries to change his call, call the director.

[sanst]

If RHO wants to change the bid, call the TD, who has to decide whether you were too slow or the opponent too fast. In the first case I would allow the change, in the second not. Anyway, there's UI.

[jillybean]

 sanst, on 2024-July-24, 01:53, said:

If RHO wants to change the bid, call the TD, who has to decide whether you were too slow or the opponent too fast. In the first case I would allow the change, in the second not. Anyway, there's UI.

Which law are you referring to?

[jillybean]

 PrecisionL, on 2024-July-24, 10:44, said:

Proper way to alert on BBO is to alert FIRST before clicking on the bid (# and suit).

Some directors chat this to the players at the beginning of the game.

Reading the OP this is apparently an old fashioned live game, with alert cards.

[sanst]

 jillybean, on 2024-July-24, 09:37, said:

Which law are you referring to?

The Laws don't regulate alerting, that's the responsibility of the RA. The Dutch alerting procedure says nothing about the speed of alerting, only how you should alert. If you're called in the situation described in the OP, you're on your own. You can't say: "Sorry, it's not in the Laws nor in the supplementary regulations, so I can't make a legal decision. Decide for yourselfs". No, you're the TD and should solve it.
Law 82A makes that his duty: "It is the responsibility of the Director to rectify errors of procedure and to maintain the progress of the game in a manner that is not contrary to these Laws." and 82B2 give him the power to "exercise any other power given to him in these Laws".

[jillybean]

It appears that Law 21 B1(a) addresses delayed Alerts and it is up to the RA to determine which bids require an alert.

LAW 21 - MISINFORMATION
A. Call or Play Based on Player’s Own Misunderstanding No rectification or redress is due to a player who acts on the basis of his own misunderstanding.

B. Call Based on Misinformation from an Opponent
1. (a) Until the end of the auction period (see Law 17D) and provided that his partner has not subsequently called, a player may change a call without other rectification for his side when the Director judges that the decision to make the call could well have been influenced by misinformation given to the player by an opponent. Failure to alert promptly where an alert is required by the Regulating Authority is deemed misinformation.

We get to the same result, and it doesn't seem that complicated but I'm always happier understanding which law I am applying.

[blackshoe]

I can't speak for anyone else, but if I were the TD, and I determined that the bidder jumped the gun, not giving his opponent enough time to alert, I would rule against him.

[jillybean]

Yes, aren’t we told to maintain a steady tempo but if my tempo is fast and my opponent does not have a chance to make the alert , I should not gain any advantage.

[pescetom]

One of the many reasons I prefer as TD to spend some time observing tables rather than merely wait to be called is that you may spot an incident like this while the gun is still smoking (and things are not worsened by the partner of misinformed making a call). In any case, you get a feel for the quirks of specific players, such as a tendency to insta-bid or to slow-alert. Without this feel it's very hard to decide on a case like this if both players insist their timing was reasonable.

[barmar]

jillybean, on 2024-July-25, 00:02, said:

Yes, aren’t we told to maintain a steady tempo but if my tempo is fast and my opponent does not have a chance to make the alert , I should not gain any advantage.

On the other hand, if you play an unusual system with lots of alertable bids, I think you need to be very attentive so you can alert promptly. In auctions that look routine to the opponents, they're not going to go out of their way to give you time to alert.

For instance, if you play Precision, and you open 1♣, your hand should already be on the Alert card because you know that most of partner's responses will be alertable.

[jillybean]

I do, In a tournament I would often have the alert card on the table rather than in the box to save a precious second.
I also used the alert card for my partners 1nt opening to assist opponents who expect 15-17 , no announcement and then claim not to have heard mine.

[pescetom]

barmar, on 2024-July-27, 19:26, said:

On the other hand, if you play an unusual system with lots of alertable bids, I think you need to be very attentive so you can alert promptly. In auctions that look routine to the opponents, they're not going to go out of their way to give you time to alert.

For instance, if you play Precision, and you open 1♣, your hand should already be on the Alert card because you know that most of partner's responses will be alertable.

Hmmm. Playing f2f without screens, there's a very fine but important line between being ready to Alert and doing anything unusual with respect to the Alert card before partner calls. Having your hand already on it conveys clear UI to partner "Your next call is alertable (you do remember this convention, right?)".

[jillybean]

pescetom, on 2024-July-28, 06:01, said:

Hmmm. Playing f2f without screens, there's a very fine but important line between being ready to Alert and doing anything unusual with respect to the Alert card before partner calls. Having your hand already on it conveys clear UI to partner "Your next call is alertable (you do remember this convention, right?)".

The only answer is to play on tablets, behind screens, in slippers.

Drones not permitted.

[mycroft]

pescetom, on 2024-July-28, 06:01, said:

Having your hand already on it conveys clear UI to partner "Your next call is alertable (you do remember this convention, right?)".

Played Strong Club with transfer positives for 5 years. If partner Alerts my 1♣ opener, he hasn't forgotten that any of his bids are Alertable.
Play Keri for the last 12 years. After 1NT-2♣; again, if partner Alerted it, she's bidding 2♦, and that's Alertable...

But yes, you are absolutely correct.

(and I'm remembering my ruling - in a National event, no less! - that yes, 2♦ is Alertable after an XYZ 2♣ call, even if "I" alerted 2♣. For one thing, if the opponents don't ask, maybe you're playing some other 2♣ convention, where 2♦ is a natural response? For another, if they do ask, and even if they get a perfect response, who knows if they understood it?)

[pescetom]

 mycroft, on 2024-July-28, 17:28, said:

But yes, you are absolutely correct.

(and I'm remembering my ruling - in a National event, no less! - that yes, 2♦ is Alertable after an XYZ 2♣ call, even if "I" alerted 2♣. For one thing, if the opponents don't ask, maybe you're playing some other 2♣ convention, where 2♦ is a natural response? For another, if they do ask, and even if they get a perfect response, who knows if they understood it?)

Sure, they might also not expect that 2♦ is NF, or that by bidding it as requested you deny a monster hand (if you play it that way).
Odd (or not) that you should hit on XYZ, because that is exactly what I was thinking about when I wrote the message above. When we started playing it, my partner struggled to consistently remember that we were in an XYZ situation. One day I congratulated him that it finally seemed to have become automatic and he replied "it's hard to miss really, I just look for you reaching towards the Alert card". Ouch.

[blackshoe]

 jillybean, on 2024-July-28, 01:52, said:

I also used the alert card for my partners 1nt opening to assist opponents who expect 15-17 , no announcement and then claim not to have heard mine.

ACBL players who do not expect an announcement when someone opens 1NT are ignorant of the rules under which they are playing, perhaps willfully so.

[mycroft]

I would say "wishful thinking" more than "willfully ignorant". It's what they *want*, so they let it go when others are silent, and "need to be reminded" when their partner opens 1NT. Having said that, there are many clubs (unfortunately including many clubs in "snowbird" regions of the US) that have decided that 15-17 doesn't need an Announcement in their club, and people hear "you don't have to do that any more" and don't hear the unspoken "in our club". It's odd how many players we have to retrain every March.

Which is fine, if they play against me and my ilk. Less so other people (perhaps including them, frankly!) who "only ask when they need to know" and whose partners guess really well afterwards. I will admit to "not enough" sympathy there :-).