[jillybean]

Scoring: IMP

---

West North East South

 -     -     -     Pass
 1♣    Pass  1♠    Dbl! (neg)
 Pass  1NT   2♣    Pass
 2♦    Pass  3NT   Pass
 Pass  Pass  

HJ H3 H4 HK
C2 C3 CA CT
CK C9 C4 D3
C6 CQ C5 H2
S6 S5 S3 S9
SQ S2 S8 DJ



Here is a TD call from one of my tournaments. South called saying that if 2♦ had been alerted they would have taken 2 tricks extra ♦ tricks. I don’t agree, on a ♦ lead I think declarer is always going to take the ace and ruff / pitch on the ♣'s.

My question is, should this bid be alerted? It seems fairly common practice to re open a short suit to create a force but I never see it alerted.

How is this treated in “live” bridge?


tyia
jb

[inquiry]

2♦ isn't reopening. It is a forcing bid. EW have found a fit (clubs bid and raised), unless 1C was precision. 2♦ is just a forcing bid. Odds are it is looking for a better contract, presumably notrump. If anything is odd, it is why EAST with a monster bid only 2♣'s which is presumably weak and non-forcing (strong hand with clubs, double 1NT for penatly). So if I was a director, it isn't the 2♦ bid that would raise an eyebrow, it is 2♣'s.

[jtfanclub]

Ummm...was this an honest suit or showing the ace? If an honest suit, I would think that there's no need to alert it: on this auction opener surely can't be looking to play in diamonds. It looks to me like opener was showing a hole in hearts and responder by bidding 3NT psyched a stopper.

The 2♦ bidder is dummy. How could his bidding 2♦ with only 3 keep them from playing the heart ace?

No adjustment here.

[jillybean]

inquiry, on Aug 6 2006, 03:34 PM, said:

2♦ isn't reopening. It is a forcing bid. EW have found a fit (clubs bid and raised), unless 1C was precision. 2♦ is just a forcing bid.

Should it be alerted, should any short suit bid to force a response from your partner be alerted?

Does 2♣ guarantee a fit or just show a willingness to play 2♣?

[inquiry]

jillybean2, on Aug 6 2006, 08:49 PM, said:

inquiry, on Aug 6 2006, 03:34 PM, said:

2♦ isn't reopening. It is a forcing bid. EW have found a fit (clubs bid and raised), unless 1C was precision. 2♦ is just a forcing bid.

Should it be alerted, should any short suit bid to force a response from your partner be alerted?

Does 2♣ guarantee a fit or just show a willingness to play 2♣?

It is just a forcing bid showin values. It is no different from, say,

1C - 3C
3D

where 3C is limit (non-forcing raise).

Do you expect 3D here to be a "suit"? I mean 1C-3C has found your fit. On this auction, after West opened 1C (natural since no alert) and east later raises to 2S (non-forcing I assume, again due to the lack of alert), this is similar. A forcing bid (clubs are trumps, but maybe you will get to notrump). It is not promising a suit, but rather values, and is forcing.

Looking at the hands, I think there might be two failures to alert. Maybe 2C was XZY (forcing 2D) either as a signoff or as a game try. Biut 3NT jump rebid is not consistant with xyz, you could have just bid 3NT immediately.

West bidding makes some sense to me. EAST;s 2C bid seems unexplainable to me.

[blackshoe]

A call or play should be alerted if the regulations of the sponsoring organization require it. You say this was one of your tournaments, so I suppose you're the sponsoring organization, at least as far as the laws are concerned (unless you're working for or running it under the auspices of someone else. So... what do your regulations say?

In general, I would not think that "manufacturing" a forcing bid would require an alert, unless you do it regularly with the same partner(s), so that they expect it.

[paulg]

blackshoe, on Aug 7 2006, 03:25 AM, said:

A call or play should be alerted if the regulations of the sponsoring organization require it. You say this was one of your tournaments, so I suppose you're the sponsoring organization, at least as far as the laws are concerned (unless you're working for or running it under the auspices of someone else. So... what do your regulations say?

In general, I would not think that "manufacturing" a forcing bid would require an alert, unless you do it regularly with the same partner(s), so that they expect it.

I echo this thought. As the administrator is always saying on the bridgetalk (laws) forum, please state the jurisdiction under which the problem is set.

Looking at this auction, it all seems bizarre to me and the table appears to consist of four beginners (Double, 1NT, 2♣, 2♦ are all strange). This does not affect any ruling save to establish the probable 'general bridge knowledge' and competence of the players. Another factor is whether these are pickup or regular partnerships.

I would have thought the first step is to ask West what the 2♦ bid was. Until this is understood then any ruling is impossible.

Paul

[paulg]

jillybean2, on Aug 7 2006, 02:49 AM, said:

inquiry, on Aug 6 2006, 03:34 PM, said:

2♦ isn't reopening. It is a forcing bid. EW have found a fit (clubs bid and raised), unless 1C was precision. 2♦ is just a forcing bid.

Should it be alerted, should any short suit bid to force a response from your partner be alerted?

Does 2♣ guarantee a fit or just show a willingness to play 2♣?

It depends what it means.

Although the answer to your question is probably yes, I do not wish to say that this means that this 2♦ bid should be alerted without further questions

The problem is that bidders rarely bid a suit just to elicit a response from partner without a reason. So they tend to know what their bid means and this permits the director to establish whether it is conventional or not.

I should also add that the ACBL (and EBU, but not WBF) define a three-card minor suit as a NATURAL bid.

Paul

[jillybean]

I did not get chance to question E/W about their bids, this was one of my personal tournaments so its run under my jurisdiction.

Players will often call saying the opps have failed to alert a bid, sometimes it is very clear one way or another, other times I find it very difficult. Getting the full information is not an easy task.

I am still not clear on alerting requirements, I will keep asking questions - thanks for the replies

jb

[paulg]

jillybean2, on Aug 7 2006, 03:26 PM, said:

I did not get chance to question E/W about their bids, this was one of my personal tournaments so its run under my jurisdiction.

Players will often call saying the opps have failed to alert a bid, sometimes it is very clear one way or another, other times I find it very difficult.  Getting the full information is not an easy task.

I am still not clear on alerting requirements, I will keep asking questions - thanks for the replies 

jb

It is probably worth establishing a firm basis for alerting requirements if you run a lot of tournaments.

Your options include copying the ACBL's policy (familiar to Americans but designed for a largely homogeneous bidding world), WBF (alert everything), HomeBaseClub (WBF w/o a couple of alerts required), any national organisation.

Personally, in the small number of tourneys I run, I use the WBF Policy and publish this in the tournament rules.

Paul

[jillybean]

Once you have a set a firm basis for alerting requirements, say you are using WBF for this example - how do you proceed here?

[paulg]

You have to ask E/W about their agreement on the bid.

If that proves impossible, and I guess this could easily happen on the last board and they leave the site, then I'd be inclined to rule that West is a novice and his bid is essentially natural so no alert is required.

2♦ is not the bid of a normal player (with Pass, 2♠, 2NT and 3♣ being among 'normal' options) and it does not look conventional, so I'd rule no infraction, no change to the table result.

Paul