another alert question and an oops
#61
Posted 2012-February-22, 19:52
#63
Posted 2012-February-22, 20:13
kevperk, on 2012-February-22, 19:55, said:
I understand. And his take on the laws in general is the best around. For some reason, he has a hangup on this situation. Your thought process is not flawed.
#64
Posted 2012-February-22, 21:55
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
#65
Posted 2012-February-23, 02:44
bluejak, on 2012-February-22, 18:43, said:
Are we to understand that the words "refusing to tell them is unethical" referred to some other comments made by some other people in some other thread? If so, does anything else that you've said in this thread that fall into the same category, or can we assume that the rest of your comments were part of the current conversation?
PS: How are you getting on with explaining why 1♥-2NT and 2♥-2NT require different types of explanation?
#66
Posted 2012-February-23, 02:50
aguahombre, on 2012-February-22, 19:00, said:
bluejak, on 2012-February-22, 18:43, said:
Without using such volatile and judgemental terms, what do you think of someone who believes there is a real difference between naming a convention which announces what you are going to do and announcing what you are going to do?
I don't think this is the distinction Bluejak is trying to make. What is unethical is using an explanation to give information to partner. What is required is to give full information to opponents. The fact that the latter inevitably gives info to partner (unless playing with screens) is unfortunate but unavoidable. In principle the information provided to partner makes his life more difficult not easier, because of how he is required to handle UI (though there is clearly a risk in practice that this can't be enforced adequately).
#67
Posted 2012-February-23, 02:53
Kevperk said:
bluejak, on 2012-February-22, 18:43, said:
Continuing with my analogy, suppose that partner opens 1♥ and I have a game-forcing raise with a side-suit of ♣KJxxx. My decision about whether to respond 2NT or 2♣ may depend on how effectively our methods after 2NT would allow me to show or evaluate the side suit. By your argument, the initial explanation of 1♥-2NT should detail all the hand-types that can subsequently be shown by opener or responder.
#68
Posted 2012-February-23, 11:30
Ok, you may think I am overboard when I consider this unethical, but do you really think hiding this information is legal?
Now some people try to muddy the waters by bringing in sequences where you do not ask a question, such as 1M - 2NT [and soon they will try 1M - 3M ], but those are not the same. When a call asks a specific question, Full Disclosure requires you to tell your opponents what the question is, and this method of trying to hide it and them claim to be doing something legal is anathema to me.
Merseyside England UK
EBL TD
Currently at home
Visiting IBLF from time to time
<webjak666@gmail.com>
#69
Posted 2012-February-23, 11:45
bluejak, on 2012-February-23, 11:30, said:
In ACBL, they call this following the rules; and according to the rules, they fully disclose the continuations.
#70
Posted 2012-February-23, 15:57
I'm not sure what most people do about 4NT. I've never asked someone what 4NT was -- I've always waited until after the auction and then asked what the response showed, and the answer has always been appropriate to the flavor of Blackwood they used. I have a hard time coming up with a situation where I'd need to know before the response.
#71
Posted 2012-February-23, 16:43
bluejak, on 2012-February-23, 11:30, said:
Ok, you may think I am overboard when I consider this unethical, but do you really think hiding this information is legal?
Now some people try to muddy the waters by bringing in sequences where you do not ask a question, such as 1M - 2NT [and soon they will try 1M - 3M ], but those are not the same. When a call asks a specific question, Full Disclosure requires you to tell your opponents what the question is, and this method of trying to hide it and them claim to be doing something legal is anathema to me.
Does some of the above refer to me or Kevperk? Or is this yet another rebuttal of some unknown person's argument from some earlier thread?
#72
Posted 2012-February-23, 23:02
aguahombre, on 2012-February-23, 11:45, said:
Who discloses these continuations, and when? If you're suggesting that the partner of a player who bid 3♣, by agreement Puppet Stayman, should say, when asked about three♣, what the continuations are, I disagree. There is no requirement in law or regulation to explain the meaning of calls which have not yet been made. In fact, I think a regulation like that would be in conflict with the laws.
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
#73
Posted 2012-February-24, 00:55
blackshoe, on 2012-February-23, 23:02, said:
You know the rules and what "disclosing the continuations means". For those who might not, the rules are that the responses to 3C are alerted and explained (if asked) and the partner of the person would made the response alerts. The alert is after the alertable bid has been made.
What I said was clear.
#74
Posted 2012-February-24, 02:43
aguahombre, on 2012-February-24, 00:55, said:
Apparently not, or I would not have questioned it.
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
#75
Posted 2012-February-25, 12:08
First, there are other situations where knowledge of what the asking bid asks for can affect the opponents' bidding. Knowing whether an ask is Ogust or a feature ask can affect whether a player thinks it is safe or necessary to overcall. This idea that a player need not disclose what 2NT is is merely an attempt to gain an unfair advantage by lack of Full Disclosure.
Second, some people think answering with a name is good enough. If someone tells their opponent that 3♣ is Stayman or 4NT is Balckwood then it is reasonable for them to assume that a 3♦ response is Stayman and a 5♦ response shows one ace out of four without further enquiry.
Quote
aguahombre, on 2012-February-23, 11:45, said:
I know of no authority for this lack of Full Disclosure. Ok, some players will do this, but it is not following the rules in my view and I know of no statements by the ACBL that this follows the rules. I believe the main reason a player does this is to gain an unfair advantage.
Merseyside England UK
EBL TD
Currently at home
Visiting IBLF from time to time
<webjak666@gmail.com>
#76
Posted 2012-February-25, 13:17
bluejak, on 2012-February-25, 12:08, said:
First, there are other situations where knowledge of what the asking bid asks for can affect the opponents' bidding. Knowing whether an ask is Ogust or a feature ask can affect whether a player thinks it is safe or necessary to overcall. This idea that a player need not disclose what 2NT is is merely an attempt to gain an unfair advantage by lack of Full Disclosure.
Who suggested that "a player need not disclose what 2NT is"?
#77
Posted 2012-February-25, 21:59
bluejak, on 2012-February-25, 12:08, said:
Cheapest club response to a NT opener is not alerted if it asks for a four-card or longer major. Responses to that cheapest club bid are alertable if they are different than a major only showing 4 and 3D denying a major. If you don't recognize the alert procedures and chart as authorities, then I see the problem. If you think, despite this authority, the 3C bidder's partner should tell the opponents what he is going to do before he does it, then I see the problem.
#78
Posted 2012-February-26, 08:35
But if you asked what the bid shows, are you not going to tell the truth?
Merseyside England UK
EBL TD
Currently at home
Visiting IBLF from time to time
<webjak666@gmail.com>
#79
Posted 2012-February-26, 09:57
If the opponents want to know what types of hands might have just bid 3C, I will answer as best I can, even though I doubt they really need that information at that time.
If the opponents want to know what my potential answers to 3C are, they not only don't need to know, but can jolly well wait and ask after the response has occurred.
#80
Posted 2012-February-26, 16:45
Merseyside England UK
EBL TD
Currently at home
Visiting IBLF from time to time
<webjak666@gmail.com>