Help
North's pass was the third consecutive pass in the (original) auction so East did not get another call!
Perhaps I should have made it clear that screens were in use.
Missing alert? EBU-land, good standard
#21
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 1,796
- Joined: 2008-September-12
- Gender:Male
Posted 2009-December-30, 16:47
#22
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 18,051
- Joined: 2006-April-17
- Gender:Male
- Location:Rochester, NY
Posted 2009-December-30, 17:02
oh, that pass. Never mind. 
--------------------
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
Our ultimate goal on defense is to know by trick two or three everyone's hand at the table. -- Mike777
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
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
Our ultimate goal on defense is to know by trick two or three everyone's hand at the table. -- Mike777
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
#23
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 1,625
- Joined: 2006-October-04
- Location:Denmark
Posted 2009-December-30, 17:33
RMB1, on Dec 31 2009, 12:18 AM, said:
I would like to think that passes that can be passed out (i.e. non-forcing) should not be alerted. But there are many positions where players expectations of the meaning of pass differ. Often they will differ within a partnership. The practical approach in such positions is to alert if you have a clear partnership understanding (even when you think that your agreement coincides with general bridge knowledge) and to not alert if you have no (partnership) understanding.
In the European Championship 2004, there was a sequence like 1C(2H)P(P),X(XX)P. Gold and Townsend knew their pass of a redouble was to play, thought that was the only way to play this sequence, thought this meaning was natural, and not did not alert. Their opponents may have thought that this was the right meaning for the pass, but in the absense of alert thought that the pass was neutral, and did the wrong thing. The TD found no consensus as to whether a pass showing a positive desire to defend was alertable (with firm views on both sides) and ruled misinformation. England appealed, expecting the only question to be the number of tricks in 2HXX, but were unsuccessful. See EBL Appeal Booklet 2004 Appeal 10, Sweden v England.
Robin
In the European Championship 2004, there was a sequence like 1C(2H)P(P),X(XX)P. Gold and Townsend knew their pass of a redouble was to play, thought that was the only way to play this sequence, thought this meaning was natural, and not did not alert. Their opponents may have thought that this was the right meaning for the pass, but in the absense of alert thought that the pass was neutral, and did the wrong thing. The TD found no consensus as to whether a pass showing a positive desire to defend was alertable (with firm views on both sides) and ruled misinformation. England appealed, expecting the only question to be the number of tricks in 2HXX, but were unsuccessful. See EBL Appeal Booklet 2004 Appeal 10, Sweden v England.
Robin
Thanks for the reference!
Michael Askgaard