[jillybean]

ACBL
Playing 4 way transfers over 1nt, should 2C "stayman" be alerted as it it is non promissory stayman?
I think yes. The opponents should know at the earliest opportunity the club bidder may not have a 4cM

I asked this question back in 2021 both here and in NZ. Here I was told responders next bid, if not supporting a major should be alerted as "may not have"
I can't find the thread now. In NZ , they just looked at me strangely, in the clubs I was playing noone played 4 way transfers.

I was listening to this podcast from NZB
and they seem to have now decided 2C non promissory stayman needs an alert, most sensible IMO

What the situation in NA?

[pescetom]

No idea of the NA situation but FWIW I disagree with your premise. Why is it urgent that the opponents should know that Responder may not have a 4 card major? And is not standard by now? I would be more interested to know if he promises any strength, or if he has a Range ask, if anything. And I can always ask anyway, or just wait a few bids and figure it out.

Alerting Stayman is a great opportunity for illegal communication by Opener, whether or not opponents ask for the explanation (in which case they get a fair bit of the UI cake themselves, of course).
My favourite regulation here is "no announcement or alert for any version of Stayman, announce the reply". Or as a sop to mycroft, "announce 2♣ natural as 'natural', any kind of Stayman as 'asking', alert any other meaning".

[jillybean]

"And is not standard by now". It is unwise to assume anything in this game, what is standard for some is unheard of for others.

"I can always ask anyway" is problematic , do you ask every time your opponents bid 2♣/1nt, or only when you are interested in the reply?
"I can figure it out" doesn't always work if you've missed your opportunity to make a call at the 2 level.

How does an alert provide an opportunity for illegal communication by Opener? To remind partner that they are playing 4 way transfer?
The same can be said for all alerts.

Opponents don't need to ask, they can take a glimpse at the fully completed, legible, accessible, Convention Card.
If we had CC's this should be prescribed method, avoiding any UI given during the antics of the ask, tell process.

[mw64ahw]

I always alert my 2♣ as non-promissory if that's what I playing.

[steve2005]

In North Amarica you do not alert any 1N-2♣ bid which asks for a 4-card or 5-card major.
When a later bid is made (like 2NT) which may not have a 4-card major you alert that bid.
Alert Procedures Update June 2025

Artificial Bids
Do NOT Alert the following bids:
Responses to Opening Bids and Overcalls
2. After an Opening No Trump Sequence or a Natural No Trump Direct Overcall, a 2C bid over 1NT or a 3C bid over 2NT
that asks about the No Trump bidder’s major suit holdings.
Alert any follow-up bid that reveals that the 2C or 3C bidder may not (or did not) hold a major suit for the bid.

[pescetom]

jillybean, on 2026-February-11, 12:56, said:

"And is not standard by now". It is unwise to assume anything in this game, what is standard for some is unheard of for others.

I agree up to a point, but maybe we have reached it... just how many people do you know who do promise a 4 card major, and even then do they always have it?
Don't get me wrong, there is nothing standard about Stayman and things are still diverging as people finally realize what a poor convention it was... but I would have thought that about the only two certainties are that Responder has 13 cards and might not have a 4 card major. I'm much more interested in whether he promises invitational strength or not and what inferences there are from other bids he might have made... but even then I struggle to see why I should not be able to wait a round to find out, without transmitting UI. Maybe I am blinkered by strong NT.

jillybean, on 2026-February-11, 12:56, said:

"I can always ask anyway" is problematic , do you ask every time your opponents bid 2♣/1nt, or only when you are interested in the reply?

Agreed again of course, and if I was prepared to ask about 2♣ (I am not, unless playing in a field where it might be natural) I would indeed ask always, just as I do after any overcall of our 1NT.
But asking after an alert is at least equally problematic.

jillybean, on 2026-February-11, 12:56, said:

How does an alert provide an opportunity for illegal communication by Opener? To remind partner that they are playing 4 way transfer?

Partner knows everyone plays 4 way transfer. Partner may not remember if I may have a 5 card major and what Stayman we actually play.
At worst, I may be telling him which Stayman I want to play or even whether I have a 5 card major.

jillybean, on 2026-February-11, 12:56, said:

Opponents don't need to ask, they can take a glimpse at the fully completed, legible, accessible, Convention Card.
If we had CC's this should be prescribed method, avoiding any UI given during the antics of the ask, tell process.

Fully agreed, of course. We're on the same side in this war.

[blackshoe]

jillybean, on 2026-February-11, 09:02, said:

What the situation in NA?

Strangely enough, the ACBL actually publishes their Alert Regulation on the web. Under "artificial bids" it says "alert all artificial bids except…" #2 among the exceptions there says "After an Opening No Trump Sequence or a Natural No Trump Direct Overcall, a 2C bid over 1NT or a 3C bid over 2NT that asks about the No Trump bidder’s major suit holdings. Alert any follow-up bid that reveals that the 2C or 3C bidder may not (or did not) hold a major suit for the bid."

Don't like that? Fair enough, but you do not have leave (from the ACBL, leave me out of it) to modify the Alert Procedure to suit yourself.

If I objected to this procedure on the grounds opponents won't be alerted soon enough, I would not play non-promissory Stayman. Which in fact I don't because I play that 2!S is a range ask with no four card major.

If you're ever asked to explain your 2!C Stayman bid and you play as I do, your explanation should include that you play the range ask. "Relevant alternative calls available that were not made" says Law 20F1.

[HardVector]

For what it's worth, I think that alerting common asking bids like Stayman is wrong. This comes up all the time with 2n-3c (puppet). The meaning of the bid regardless of what system you are using is the same, "partner, describe your hand". The same thing is happening here, 1n-2c, "partner, describe your hand". The only person benefitting from an alert of that bid, is the partner of the person making the alert. If you hear 1n-2c *alert, the person who made the 2c bid now goes, "oh yeah, we are doing that" and now knows exactly what the responses mean.

[pescetom]

blackshoe, on 2026-February-11, 15:56, said:

Strangely enough, the ACBL actually publishes their Alert Regulation on the web. Under "artificial bids" it says "alert all artificial bids except…" #2 among the exceptions there says "After an Opening No Trump Sequence or a Natural No Trump Direct Overcall, a 2C bid over 1NT or a 3C bid over 2NT that asks about the No Trump bidder’s major suit holdings.

Kudos to ACBL then. This is one of the few sensible modifications I managed to obtain in our regulations too.

blackshoe, on 2026-February-11, 15:56, said:

Alert any follow-up bid that reveals that the 2C or 3C bidder may not (or did not) hold a major suit for the bid."

This OTOH seems like bringing the elephant back in through the window. Why not just announce the meaning of any follow-up bid? It should soon become clear to opponents what opener holds or does not hold in the majors and what the 2C bidder holds or did not hold. Always assuming they have a real need to know before deciding the lead.

[jillybean]

blackshoe, on 2026-February-11, 15:56, said:

Strangely enough, the ACBL actually publishes their Alert Regulation on the web. Under "artificial bids" it says "alert all artificial bids except…" #2 among the exceptions there says "After an Opening No Trump Sequence or a Natural No Trump Direct Overcall, a 2C bid over 1NT or a 3C bid over 2NT that asks about the No Trump bidder’s major suit holdings. Alert any follow-up bid that reveals that the 2C or 3C bidder may not (or did not) hold a major suit for the bid."

When I play 4 way transfer I may not be asking about NT bidder's major suit holdings, it's simply a relay to let responder show an invitational hand.


Every time I google acbl alert regulations my first search result takes me to a page "outdated - for reference only Alert Procedures",
the second result is the ACBL document library. I'm glad others can find it easily.

[jillybean]

HardVector, on 2026-February-11, 16:02, said:

For what it's worth, I think that alerting common asking bids like Stayman is wrong. This comes up all the time with 2n-3c (puppet). The meaning of the bid regardless of what system you are using is the same, "partner, describe your hand". The same thing is happening here, 1n-2c, "partner, describe your hand". The only person benefitting from an alert of that bid, is the partner of the person making the alert. If you hear 1n-2c *alert, the person who made the 2c bid now goes, "oh yeah, we are doing that" and now knows exactly what the responses mean.

When you hear 2♣ many will expect the bidder to hold a 4cM, could it be useful information to know this may not be true?

[pescetom]

jillybean, on 2026-February-11, 17:00, said:

When you hear 2♣ many will expect the bidder to hold a 4cM, could it be useful information to know this may not be true?

The opposite argument is strong.
But in the meantime, could you give an example of a layout where it is urgent for 4th seat to know whether Responder has a 4cM, regardless of what you may expect?

[jillybean]

The opposite argument in that the responder may have forgotten they are playing 4 way transfers so the alert will be a wakeup call?
As I said above, this is a flawed reason to avoid full disclosure. We alert our weak nt ranges, should we stop because it's a wake up for partner?

1nt (X*) 2C (?) if the 2C may be a relay it may effect 4th seat willingness to show a major.

[blackshoe]

jillybean, on 2026-February-11, 16:50, said:

Every time I google acbl alert regulations my first search result takes me to a page "outdated - for reference only Alert Procedures",
the second result is the ACBL document library. I'm glad others can find it easily.

Go to www.acbl.org. You will see a red button near the top of the page labelled "menu". Click on that. Under "Helpful Information" click on "Tournaments", expanding the menu. Click on "Charts, Rules, and Regs". Scroll down. Under "Tournament Specific Regulations" the first item is "Alert Procedures". You might find the second link there, "Recent Changes" also useful.

[steve2005]

jillybean, on 2026-February-11, 17:00, said:

When you hear 2♣ many will expect the bidder to hold a 4cM, could it be useful information to know this may not be true?

If they are playing 2♣ as puppet Stayman which does not require an alert the may only have a 3-card major.

[pescetom]

jillybean, on 2026-February-11, 17:31, said:

1nt (X*) 2C (?) if the 2C may be a relay it may effect 4th seat willingness to show a major.

That is not analogous to the situation
1nt (P) 2C (?)
which we are discussing and for which I await an example of a hand that needs to know if Responder may not have a 4 card major.

Of course after interference of double Advancer often wants to know what 2C means. Not that an explanation "asking, may not have a 4 card major" will make it much easier to decide whether to show a major or not than would "asking, has a 4 card major".

[pescetom]

blackshoe, on 2026-February-11, 17:54, said:

Go to www.acbl.org. You will see a red button near the top of the page labelled "menu". Click on that. Under "Helpful Information" click on "Tournaments", expanding the menu. Click on "Charts, Rules, and Regs". Scroll down. Under "Tournament Specific Regulations" the first item is "Alert Procedures". You might find the second link there, "Recent Changes" also useful.

Thanks.
There is a lot of confused blurb before one can locate the Menu, the site could do with a tone down and rethink.

Once into the Menu, it's still not easy to find the rules and regulations. Maybe substitute "Ethics and Discipline" with "Rules, Regulations and Discipline" so that one does not have to guess to try under Tournaments?

[mycroft]

The reason why you are bidding *the cheapest* level of clubs after an "opening NT sequence" (usually, but nowhere *near* always, a Natural NT opening bid) is irrelevant to the Alertability of the call. If partner is expected to show major suit Length, it's not Alertable.

The reason why you are bidding ... is very relevant to the Alertability of your *rebid*. if that call makes it possible that "Hey, I might have just been/was using Stayman as a puppet call to show *this hand*", then you Alert. When they ask, you can make it clear. So your concern is handled, just not on the first round.

Conversely, if an auction proceeds without an Alert (immediate or Delayed, but I can't really think of a Delayed Alertable agreement with this sequence right now), the opponents can assume that you had a 4-card Major and wanted to find a 4-4 major fit.

If the opponents need to know at the time of the 2♣ call whether it promises a major or not, they can ask. I truly hope, if that is the case, they *always* ask. It is the opinion of the C&CC that the number of times this is relevant to the opponents' action over 2♣ (and wide knowledge that a significant amount of the field plays *something* that fits here, so it *will not be* a surprise to the opponents) is so small as to be ignorable. During the *play*, absolutely; but they'll know by then, won't they?

Interesting thought, though, that I didn't realize, but is obvious after seeing it: 2NT-3♣; 3♥-3NT is Alertable "may not have a 4-card Major" if 3♣ is 5-card. As is 4♥ (actually, that would be one of those Delayed Alert things I couldn't think of above :-). The other odd point being that 2NT-3♣; 3♥ is not Alertable whether it promises 4 or 5 hearts (something I am/was uncomfortable with, and never didn't Alert before I was shown this) - so those "may not have a 4-card Major" Alerts are the way to "show" to the opponents that 3♥ promised 5. (I think, given all of this, that this auction is going into my "just explain it before they lead, unless I'm on defence" pile).

[jillybean]

Thanks, it's good to know even if I am the only one worried about it. I'll remember to alert in the antipodes.
pescetom, bidding is aggressive. 4th seat, I may want to make a major showing bid if I know RHO may not have one.
and I agree the website could be cleaned up. Only a few are interested in the Laws so it buried where no one will stumble across it, most are interested in MP and games.

[pescetom]

jillybean, on 2026-February-12, 10:50, said:

pescetom, bidding is aggressive. 4th seat, I may want to make a major showing bid if I know RHO may not have one.

Sure, we are all aggressive, even 4th seat against strong NT and Responder bidding, especially with the right hand/vulnerability.
Sorry if I sound (and realize I am) insistive, but how and how often does knowing RHO may not have a 4 card major change your bidding from knowing (if it was ever possible) that RHO has one?
It's a sincere question on my part, because here our Alert procedure was sabotaged last time around (after discussion finally agreeing that 2♣ asking should have no alert/announcement) by someone who wanted a non-promissory ask alerted.
I fail to see any reason and am aggrieved because this effectively demolishes the idea behind the eminently reasonable "silence over the ask and announce the reply" approach
As this year is our last chance to make amends, I wish to understand if I am wrong.