[kayin801]

I play a precision system with transfer responses so that a sequence might go as follows (no interference):

1C (16+ forcing) - 1H (5+ spades, GF)
1S (3+ spades, sets trumps, demands responder show the # of controls he/she has)

Clearly 1C and 1H are alertable, and the response to 1S is, but is 1S itself alertable? It is simultaneously natural and an asking bid. It reminds me of how kickback RKC isn't alertable, though here 1S doesn't necessarily suggest slam.

How about on this sequence, but with a preempt, where bidding responder's suit has the same meaning and demands as in the previous auction:
1C-(P)-1H-(3D)-
3S

Is 3S alertable here?

ACBL ruling is most relevant to me, but not adverse to rulings under other guidelines. Also, sorry if this question has been asked before, I fail at topic-searching.

[TylerE]

I play a similar system and always alert the asking bids.

[aguahombre]

I don't know if all natural bids which carry dual messages are alertable, but we do.
We only say, "in addition to setting trumps, it asks for further information."

That way we stop short of announcing what the follow-ups will mean but alert the follow-ups for what they meant.

[kayin801]

aguahombre, on Dec 10 2009, 05:12 PM, said:

I don't know if all natural bids which carry dual messages are alertable, but we do.
We only say, "in addition to setting trumps, it asks for further information."

That way we stop short of announcing what the follow-ups will mean but alert the follow-ups for what they meant.

Yeah, I've been alerting them as a courtesy, and yours seems like a good way of alerting them, but I wasn't sure if this counted as "waking partner up" to an artificial sequence (though we wouldn't miss this one), or if it were more of a friendly alert similar to alerting inferences from support doubles. I didn't know if there was an official ruling on this kind of bid or not though.

[blackshoe]

Kickback is alertable, but because it is a bid above 3NT and normally occurs after responder's first bid, the alert shall be delayed until after the auction is over (after the final pass, but before the opening lead is chosen).

The final spade bids in your two auctions require an alert. I agree that the explanation, if requested, should only say "asks for more information" or some such, not what information is requested, and certainly not what the next bid will show.

An alert may give UI to partner. That's okay, you still have to alert. If UI constrains partner, that's too bad, but it's not your problem, it's his.

[barmar]

Although the bid is natural, it's also conventional (the opposite of natural is artificial -- all artificial bids are conventional, but not vice versa). I think the bid should be alerted because of its conventional nature, even though it's natural.