[Dragan]

I think that penalty is to high.
Maximum penalty should be procedural warning.

Dragan

[jdulmage]

The_Hog, on Oct 12 2004, 05:29 PM, said:

"On other continents, is Unusual 2NT for two lower unbid alerted? "

Absolutely alertable in Australia, as it should be. (Incidentally so is Stayman).
I'm very surprised this is non alertable in the States. There are so many different 2 suiter overcalls available, how can I be expected to know what you play? Even more relevant, how can I be expected to know the possible ranges of the bid?

It is not alertable in North America and why should it be?

Overcalling 2NT over an open CAN'T POSSIBLE be a 20-22 balanced hand. That is just novice bidding. With 20-22, you would dbl and then make a huge jump showing that hand.

These kinds of techniques have been practiced for years upon years and if they need alerting, then something is wrong in the bridge world.

[the hog]

"Overcalling 2NT over an open CAN'T POSSIBLE be a 20-22 balanced hand. That is just novice bidding. With 20-22, you would dbl and then make a huge jump showing that hand.

These kinds of techniques have been practiced for years upon years and if they need alerting, then something is wrong in the bridge world"

What an arrogant comment! There are many ways of playing 2NT. Look at the Roman 2N overcall to start off with. Why should I have to second guess the way you play it? The whole purpose of alerting is so that I don't need to guess, ask and thus possibly convey ui to my partner.

Furthermore if you are playing against novices who might misinterpret the bid, do you want to win so much that you hide your methods from them? This does not sound like active ethics to me. Don't they practice them in your area?

[hotShot]

If you follow this rule you will hardly run into trouble:

Any bid should be alerted, that does not show length the suit bid, that does not have the hcp range one would expect or additionally promisses a defined length or strength in another suit.
A minor should have 3+ cards a major 4+ cards and NT should show a balanced hand.

Following this you will have to alert:
Stayman, Transfer, nonforcing bids, preempts, splinter, fit jumps, 4th suit forcing, etc.

[1eyedjack]

hotShot, on Oct 18 2004, 06:23 AM, said:

If you follow this rule you will hardly run into trouble:

Any bid should be alerted, that does not show length the suit bid, that does not have the hcp range one would expect or additionally promisses a defined length or strength in another suit.
A minor should have 3+ cards a major 4+ cards and NT should show a balanced hand.

Following this you will have to alert:
Stayman, Transfer, nonforcing bids, preempts, splinter, fit jumps, 4th suit forcing, etc.

If the converse is that a bid that does NOT fall into those criteria should NOT be alerted, then you will presumably NOT be alerting a natural 2C response to 1NT (showing Clubs). Whilst there is certainly some logic to that, I think that most opponents will not be operating under those rules and will not therefore find this helpful or expected.

[Chamaco]

Quote

QUOTE (helene_t @ Oct 13 2004, 04:58 PM)
I'm glad to hear that artificial calls are alertable in Australia, that gives me yet another reason to migrate  . 

QUOTE (Luke Warm)
can i hitch a ride with you?

Quote

The_Hog Posted on Oct 13 2004, 11:44 PM
  You can both stay at my place. 

Quote

Luke Warm Posted
deal!!!! now all we need is a 4th 

Since I cannot hope to earn my place due to bridge skills, i may try to corrupt you folks by cooking italian food ...

[luke warm]

your skills are fine, but there's always room for someone who can cook

errr i guess i shouldn't be invitin' folks to ron's place heheh

[McBruce]

(Back to the original question: 1♦ - 2NT showing clubs and hearts, no alert, adjusted score awarded by TD.)

It would have been better for us to make a judgment by seeing the full hand and other pertinent information. Without it we have no way of answering questions like:

Did you have a convention card loaded that the opponents might have looked at?

What is the nature of the damage claimed by the opponents?

Is this damage directly related to the non-alert?

Were the opponents experienced players, enough to know better before coming into an auction on a dubious assumption about the meaning of a bid?


It's far from clear that an adjustment is called for here, although I can see cases where one might be given. 2NT has so many possible meanings that I think in online bridge the onus should be on the opponents to ask privately if they need to, when any such ambiguous bid is not alerted. The idea that an opponent hearing the 2NT bid can take a shot and ask for an adjustment later if it doesn't work troubles me, ESPECIALLY in an environment where we can ask about a bid privately with no chance of unauthorized information being passed.

[dlsoeagle]

I'd just like to tag along to see some of BBO's finest people in Australia