[Oof Arted]

West opens 3♦ alerted bog standard pre-empt in ♦'s
North overcalls 3♥
East Doubles (no alert)
all pass

Result minus a cluster

South calls Director 'We have been damaged by failure to alert the PENALTY double

No hands just rule

[hrothgar]

What set of (local) regulations are in effect?

In particular, if the auction starts

3♦ - (3♥) - X

Is a penalty double alertable?

If the penalty double is NOT alertable, then there is no foul.

If the penalty double is alertable - which I would find somewhat surprising - I would instruct the partnership that raised the complaint to demonstrate that they were damaged by the failure to alert.

[gnasher]

hrothgar, on Jul 17 2009, 01:06 PM, said:

If the penalty double is alertable - which I would find somewhat surprising

Come and play in England and you'll experience a wealth of such surprises.

[helene_t]

Everybody play this double as penalty.

[se12sam]

This is one of the problems in the EBU "Alerting guidelines"
http://www.ebu.co.uk/publications/Conventi...nts%20Table.pdf
See the top two lines on page 2. If I read it correctly, it states that the dbl needs to be alerted.

In this case, where anyone that has played bridge knows that 3♥x can only be a penalty dbl, I think the director may not rule in N/S favour (especially because N/S did not do anything to protect themselves).

[jillybean]

Ask him what he would have done if the double had been alerted as penalty.

[helene_t]

The chart says that all penalty dbl on natural suit bids must be alerted.

That is not correct. A penalty double at the 4-level and higher must not be alerted.

Anyway, it is strictly correct that 3♦-(3♥)-dbl as penalties must be alerted.

[rkb39]

see their convention card, opp could have asked. 3H x score stands

[greenender]

This is an example of the general tension between simplicity and appropriateness in alerting regulations.

For the sake of simplicity there is a rule that unalerted doubles of natural suit bids [up to a certain level] are for takeout.

If you wanted to make all alerts as appropriate as possible (i.e. alert the unexpected, don't alert the familiar), then you'd have to make a lot of complex rules or have exceptions to your nice simple general rules, and everyone would get into a mess.

Here you have a meaning which is technically alertable, but which is not in fact at all unexpected. So you ask what the player would have done differently with an alert.

In the EBU we have a rule which says that players should protect themselves if they know what is likely going on and can ask without putting their side's interests at risk. Here the player is likely to know that:

1. Nearly everyone plays this double as penalty; and

2. Quite a lot of people don't bother to alert it.

So it is wise for him to protect himself because it is frankly rather unlikely that the message sent by the non-alert is actually genuine. That pre-supposes of course that he has somewhere to escape to if he knows the double is penalty.

Although this is only a regulation in the EBU, AFAIK, it seems a helpful approach anywhere.

[blackshoe]

Interesting. We request that everyone indicate the jurisdiction under which their problems are presented. There's a reason for this: regulations are different in different places. Someone did ask, in this thread, what regulations are in force. Every other post assumed EBU regulations. I'm not going to do that. Nor am I going to answer the original question until I know what regulations I'm ruling under.

I do have one further question: whyinhell did South alert a "bog standard" preempt?

[Oof Arted]

Yes its England

No South did not alert Wests pre-empt

[blackshoe]

Okay. Whyinhell did East alert it?

[bluejak]

I see that my mate Ed got in first. But let me stress as well how important it is that opening posters put their jurisdiction, normally their country, or put online. The "Description" box is suitable.

Ok, let us in on the secret: why was 3♦ alerted?



For information:

5H1, on EBU Orange book 2006, said:

A player’s claim to have been damaged because the opponents failed to alert or announce a call will fail if it is judged that the player was aware of its likely meaning and if he had the opportunity to ask without putting his side’s interests at risk.

[FrancesHinden]

If South
- has been taught to play double as take-out in this auction
- is a near beginner/has not played much against anyone other than his class mates
- had somewhere obvious to run to

Then I would (well,might) rule in his favour.
Otherwise not.

Yes, a penalty double is technically alertable in the EBU
Yes, I (generally) hate to apply the 'you should protect yourself' rule because it shouldn't be necessary.

But come on, even my friend's cat plays this as penalties.

[campboy]

This feels like a bit of a catch-22 situation, in that anyone who is experienced enough to be aware of what the alerting rules are in this situation is going to be experienced enough to be expected to protect himself. Not that that's a bad thing, per se, but it does make alerts rather useless here.

[FrancesHinden]

campboy, on Jul 21 2009, 09:17 PM, said:

This feels like a bit of a catch-22 situation, in that anyone who is experienced enough to be aware of what the alerting rules are in this situation is going to be experienced enough to be expected to protect himself. Not that that's a bad thing, per se, but it does make alerts rather useless here.

Yes, I agree.
But let's not get into that discussion again.

[bluejak]

Umm.

I do not think experience, and understanding EBU alerting of doubles, actually go together. Better players keep saying "Oh, I cannot be bothered with these alerts, they are far too difficult to understand" while poorer players do not understand them until someone explains them once, then they understand them perfectly.