[gwnn]

I agreed to Ghestem with my partner. I almost never play Ghestem but I almost never forget system either.

I pick up a 1246 with QJT9xx of clubs and a little else. (surely you know where this is going...)

p-1♠-3♣ by me of course.

it goes:

p-1♠-3♣-p
p-p

partner doesn't alert 3♣ so I sort of know he also forgot. they don't ask about 3♣ at all.

now what exactly are my obligations and ugh. ?

while we're on the subject I had this:

(1♣)-3♣*

which we agreed to long diamonds, ask for stop. I remembered partner being reluctant to agree to this and calling it an insane agreeement. Also 1♣ was 2+ (we agreed that all these nebulous minor openings will be treated as natural except x doesn't promise 3 cards in the other minor that often). I alerted 3♣ almost without looking at my hand, but then I saw I had something like

Qxx Kxxx KQx QJx (maybe a little weaker). Only after I put the alert card did I realize he probably has just clubs.

Should I really explain the agreement and pass 3♣? It just doesn't sound right to me.

[Codo]

With screens I would alert the bid as it was discussed and after one or two disasters I would state: The agreement is Ghestem, but we sometimes forget this." and "This is asking for stoppers with running diamonds but I know that my partner was afraid to forget this, in this case he has lonng weak clubs."

With the second hand I had simply bid 3 NT. This may make or be a good save and is the right bid according to the agreement.

[gwnn]

no screens of course. no screens makes everything more interesting.

[helene_t]

The first one I would not explain anything. You thought you have shown clubs, partner thought so, you have clubs. If your agreement is really Ghestem then technically I suppose you have to explain it before the opening lead, but the TD may not believe you de facto have that agreement when you both forgot.

The second one I think there is a case for alerting as failure to alert may convey the UI that you can see in your own hand that partner forgot. Also you may alert on the basis of the possibility that p meant 3♣ as showing the majors (some variants of Ghestem use that).

Disagree with Roland about the explanation "we play Ghestem but we sometimes forget". It is not helpful to opps as they may have one defense against Ghestem and another defense against natural 3♣ bid, but probably no agreed defense against "two-way Ghestem". Besides, if BSC's are not allowed you can't have the de facto agreement that 3♣ shows either clubs or the majors.

You have to pick one or the other and then hope it matches what partner happens to have. Saying "no agreement" is not right when actually you have an agreement.

[hanp]

This is ridiculous, stop playing Ghestem. And don't explain unless you needlessly want a fight.

[peachy]

Both partners forgetting is good reason not to play that method. Don't agree to play Ghestem. Hopefully your partner takes this advice also.

It is annoying to play against folks who do not know what they are doing. If you keep it on card, it essentially means "either clubs or Ghestem" and that is an illegal agreement in most playing environments.

[helene_t]

peachy, on Jan 18 2010, 01:34 PM, said:

Don't agree to play Ghestem. Hopefully your partner takes this advice also.

Q: Is Ghestem a popular convention?
A: Well, only 5% of our players play it. OTOH, 50% think their partners play it.

[Rossoneri]

Csaba, I suggest you ask this in the Law forums, would be more relevant. Also, I quite agree with Helene about the ethical/legal parts regarding explanations. I would quite rightly slap a pair with a PP if they explained a bid as "clubs or ghestem".

[MFA]

Call the director. You should do that anytime there is a potential problem with your side's alerts or explanations. Especially if you are unsure of what to say.

The exception is that if partner has explained or alerted wrongly you should wait until after the bidding (if your side got the contract) or after the play (if your side was defending), so you don't illegally inform him about his misunderstanding.

[gwnn]

nothing about the second question? It's not as interesting as the first one I guess but it's less ridiculous. I know about not playing Ghestem. This is not the point.

[jdonn]

I don't care if it's what the laws say to do or not, I think there are only two fair options. Either say nothing, or (and if they ask or seem to suspect something you should definitely choose this one) tell them you play Ghestem but you forgot and you have clubs. It's one of the situations where good sportsmanship dictates you be (much) more helpful than you are required to be legally.

[Jlall]

Yeah I would always tell them "We play Ghestem, but we both forgot LOLOLOLOL, I have clubs." I would definitely look down on someone who had clubs and said "there has been a failure to alert, we play Ghestem" and that's it. I think telling them that you both forgot is better than just saying nothing.

[barmar]

BTW, the answer to the question in the thread title is "Yes". This is one of the trickiest issues that comes up with forgetting system agreements.

Someone mentioned that you should call the director when you realize there's been a problem. However, there's a good chance the director won't be able to figure out what the right thing is to do in this case. Consider all the different answers that have been given in this thread, any one of those responders could be the director who comes to your table.

[ArtK78]

Many years ago, my partner and I played Romex. At the time, the Dynamic 1NT opening was not permitted. So we played a natural 1NT showing 19-21 HCP (the same thing as the Mexican 2♦ opening of that era) and used a 2♦ opening to show the hand represented by the Dynamic 1NT. No one seemed to have any problem with our doing this.

For lack of a better option (or none that we could think of at the time), we decided to keep the response structure for the Mexican 2♦ bid in tact (which, of course, started with 2♥), even though we opened those hands 1NT. We decided to use the responses of 2♣ and 2♦ as signoffs.

Needless to say, these hands don't arise very frequently. Finally one came along, and my partner opened 1NT, duly alerted. I responded 2♣ STAYMAN! He bid 2♦! I bid 3NT. Everything appeared quite normal.

About 20 minutes later, one of us woke up to the fact that we had totally blown our partnership agreement.

[debrose]

When both partners forget an agreement, imo it is rather unlikely to be a mere coincidence. Most players would not be bidding a Ghestem 3♣ in the same tempo as a natural 3♣ - particularly a player unaccustomed to using the convention. Of course it's also possible for a player to figure out partner almost certainly forgot exclusively from his own hand - as in the second question in the OP - but it would be unrealistic to pretend that the tempo issue doesn't exist.

As to the questions in the OP, on the first question my immediate thought was that it's okay to say nothing, but it's better to say what Justin Lall does - that you agreed to play Ghestem, but you both forgot and that you have clubs. I think it would be totally inappropriate to simply say that you have an agreement to play Ghestem, since the fact that you both forgot makes that dubious (yes, I know you "agreed" to it, but if it's never come up and you both forget, by my definition that's not a real agreement). Actually, I suppose you really must say what Justin Lall does, since the opponents should have the right to pursue the potential unauthorized information issue (that your partner may have forgotten due to your tempo)

As to the second question in the original post, I would think you should alert, and explain to the opponents exactly what you said here: you told partner you wanted to play this, he reluctantly agreed but said it was insane, it (I'm presuming this) hasn't come up before, etc.....

[debrose]

BTW, I did not mean to imply that in this case, or in general, the partner of the bidder intentionally decided to play their partner to have forgotten due to their tempo. That would be actively unethical, which I don't think most players are. When the bidder's partner also actually forgets a bid is conventional, I believe it's often due to subconscious unauthorized information, which just makes the player human. To actively fight this happening, a partnership needs to avoid playing conventions either player is likely to forget, and also to avoid playing conventions if you can't make the conventional bid in the same tempo you would make a natural bid in the same situation. This becomes a little easier if you are the habit of taking at least two seconds for every bid, something I would highly recommend.

[Mbodell]

Jlall, on Jan 18 2010, 04:32 PM, said:

Yeah I would always tell them "We play Ghestem, but we both forgot LOLOLOLOL, I have clubs." I would definitely look down on someone who had clubs and said "there has been a failure to alert, we play Ghestem" and that's it. I think telling them that you both forgot is better than just saying nothing.

Yeah, I think you need to tell them you have an agreement to play Ghestem. After all what if partner didn't forget (only forgot to alert) but actually has something like the remaining clubs and decided to play there instead?

[gnasher]

Mbodell, on Jan 20 2010, 12:52 PM, said:

Yeah, I think you need to tell them you have an agreement to play Ghestem. After all what if partner didn't forget (only forgot to alert) but actually has something like the remaining clubs and decided to play there instead?

Another possibility is that he did forget the agreement, but one reason for that was that his hand makes a red two-suiter unlikely. If he were short in the red suits, he'd be more likely to remember the agreement.

The opponents are entitled to that inference, so you have to tell them your agreement.