[TheVixon]

Is the alert procedure different in online bride than live duplicate bridge? Do I understand correctly that in live bridge the partner of the artificial bidder must alert or announce?

[Flame]

Right

[helene_t]

Other diferences:
- Online, you usually give explanation voluntarilly. Offline, you simply alert, and only explain when asked.
- Online, you alert and explain "everything", Offline, some calls can't be alerted no matter what they mean (most calls at the 4-level, for example), and some deviating agreements are not alertable (negative freebids, in most jurisdictions, for example).

These differences are due to the fact that offline, partner can see your alert (or fail to alert) which gives him UI. To reduce that problem, the scope of the alert procedure is more limited.

[Free]

Helen said it all. Welcome to the forum

[ArcLight]

If a partnership uses "very weak" preempts, is it customary to pre-alert at the start of a session? I think one normally expects 6 cards for a 2 level opening bid, and 7 for a 3. I'm not saying you can never deviate, but as a general guideline.

Example: A 3 level opening bid with 6 cards, a 2 level opening bid with 5 cards.


I find myself constantly asking the opponents partner about "routine bids".

- What do you expect for this bid? (1S - 3S = Limit raise, but they only had 3 trumps!)
- How frequently does your partner deviate

It can be hard to get a straight answer.


"We use very weak 2 and 3 level bids, frequently with few HCP and with 5 or 6 cards" is a good reply.

"It can be anything" is not. Because then I have to start playing 20 questions and ask specific questions of frequencies, and typical holdings.

[barmar]

These days, aggressive preempting is practically standard. In 3rd seat non-vulnerable, I think you'll find that most good players preempt about a level higher than "normal".

And limit raise with only 3 cards is part of SAYC.

[ArcLight]

>These days, aggressive preempting is practically standard. In 3rd seat non-vulnerable, I think you'll find that most good players preempt about a level higher than "normal".

I was not refering to 3rd seat, yes those are expectected to be even weaker/bolder. I'm talikng about 1st seat.


>And limit raise with only 3 cards is part of SAYC.

Is that true? I don't think most players expect just 3 cards, they expect 4.
Todays standard for a Limit Raise is 4 cards, not 3.

This does cause a problem if different people have different meanings for teh term "Limit Raise"

Me> What does your pards bid mean?

Them> A Limit Raise

Me> Whats that?

Them> 3+ cards and 10-12 points

Me> Is that 10-12 HCP or 10-12 Support Points?

Them> 10-12 HCP

This is annoying to have to do on many hands.

[mycroft]

One other "yes" answer to the OP:

Online is it's own (many, in fact) Sponsoring Organizations.

Alert procedure is different in different countries; so the answer to your question would be "yes" no matter what, even if the alert procedure for this online event matched Germany's exactly, for instance, itwould be different than offline for me (ACBL).

But yeah, Self-Alert, explain automatically, and be generous (while accurate to your agreements) in your explanations. Partner can't hear, so you aren't giving anything away. Some people have an idea that "minimum explanations" are best - whether it's just easier, or they don't want to "give information away", or they simply don't realize that people play "Limit raise" or "weak 2" differently than they do - and this is to be strongly discouraged. The Law says "complete disclosure", and complete disclosure is what you should try for (as best you can, without typing for 5 minutes).

Michael.

[kenberg]

Yes, Arc, it is true that in SAYC 1M-3M only promises three trump. 1M-1NT is not forcing and so you have a problem if you have an 11 count and three trump. Of course there are other ways to solve this problem, but SAYC does it by allowing the raise on three.

I agree that it is often difficult to extract information from opponents, but when I am playing online I seldom have close agreements. With most partners, the correct explanation of 1M-3M is that it is invitational. To say more would be to go beyond anything that we have agreed upon or even discussed.

This is relevant to the discussion of online versus f2f alerting: In f2f when I need to explain my partner's bid I can state our agreements (discussed, implied, or by observation) and then tell them, if they persist, that I have told them everything I know. In online bridge, where I alert and explain my own bid, I know if I have three or four trump and I know how many high card points I have, but invitational is often still the correct explanation of our agreement. The same thing can happen when I open a weak two. Opponents may insist that I tell them, for example, whether I promise two of the top three honors. I play online with many people who have no idea what to expect from my weak two opening. When that is the case, I don't tell the opponents what I believe a proper weak two is (usually six, and when vulnerable I have the sort of suit that partner should contemplate 3N with values and a fitting card). When playing with a more regular partner, I am more disclosive sine I expect partner to have a better idea of what I am doing, even if we have not discussed it. I welcome comment on this approach.

Ken

[ArcLight]

If its a pick up partnership "No Agreement" is fine.

I'm talking about regular pairs that play together.

Should they pre-alert what their weak 2/3 range is. Or just self alert it when the bid is made?

"Our weak 2's may be on 5 or 6 cards with around 0-6 HCP"

But if their pard knows that its 90% of the time on 6, they should disclose that. So there is a break in the action while the othe rpartner is asked

<"What do you expect for pards bid"

>"Our weak 2's may be on 5 or 6 cards with around 0-6 HCP"

<"How often on 5?"
<"How often on 0-3?"

My point is the established partnership still has a better idea of what their pard has than the opps, and they don't explain it well.

I could open a weak 2 with 5 cards and 0 HCP once a year, and them my pard could say "he opens on 5 or 6 cards, could be as low as 0". Thats theoretically true, but not what my par expects.

Here is another:
Opps were in a slam auction.
After it was over I asked about a bid.

"Its forcing of course!" was the response.
Not quite what I had in mind.

[barmar]

ACBL's Alert Procedures says:

Quote

If it is your partnership style to routinely open hands with fewer than 11 HCP, preempt with very weak (frequently worse than Qxxxxx) suits, and/or overcalls with fewer than 6 HCP at the one level, the opponents must be pre-Alerted.

and

Quote

NOTE: Partnerships whose systems include extremely aggressive methods, such as frequent use of four-card overcalls at the two level or higher, weak two-bids with bad five-card suits, or three-level preempts with bad six-card and/or most five-card suits must pre-Alert the opponents before the round begins.

So frequent weak 2's with QTxxx would probably need to be pre-alerted, but KQTxx probably wouldn't. They don't mention anything about the hand strength requirements for a weak 2, though, just the suit quality.

The pamphlet's definition of "natural" is:

Quote

(1)Three or more cards in a minor suit.
(2) Four or more cards in a major suit.
(3) Four or more cards for an overcall in a suit at the one level.
(4) Five or more cards for a weak two-bid.
(5) Six or more cards for a three-level preempt.

Of course, ACBL's procedures only apply to play within their jurisdiction.

[zasanya]

In our country playing f2f without screens the partner of the player who has made artificial bid alerts.
Playing with screens. one self alerts the call to ones screenmate then explains the bid and removes the alert card. When the tray passes to the other side the partner of the artificial bidder explains it to his screen mate.

[howsthaat]

Online I alert every bid that is artificial or that the ops are not likely to understand.Although here in Australia we are banned by law from alerting bids over 3NT,cue bids of ops' suit and doubles as these are considered as self alerting.I was playing here the other day with my reg partner and we had a sequence of bids that we alerted and were asked "Is this a learner's table"because of all the explainations .I know that at at least 1 of our local clubs we are known as "The Knock Knock Twins"due to our frequent alerts.We also offer to explain the entire auction before the ops lead(this is also a requirement in Ozzie bridge...but rarely adhered to).

So keep alerting everthing and when in doubt alert.

As an aside why do people here press the alert button and then not fill in the box?It just means more wasted time asking and waiting for answer.

[Blofeld]

howsthaat, on Jul 23 2006, 10:55 AM, said:

As an aside why do people here press the alert button and then not fill in the box?It just means more wasted time asking and waiting for answer.

If the opponents know what you're playing then tagging the alert box is a good reminder that it's artificial and takes less time than typing an explanation they already know.