[pilcaroo]

2♣-pass-pass-?

Is the player in the pass out seat required to inquire about the nature of the 2♣ bid in order to protect himself?

If so, where in the Laws is this specified?

Thank you

[RMB1]

pilcaroo, on 2014-January-01, 10:40, said:

2♣-pass-pass-?

Is the player in the pass out seat required to inquire about the nature of the 2♣ bid in order to protect himself?

If a strong 2♣ is alertable and a natural 2♣ is not alertable, and there was no alert, I think a player in pass-out seat can assume 2♣ is natural.

If a strong 2♣ is not alertable, the player should inquire rather than assume that it is a strong 2♣ opener and responder is asleep.

pilcaroo, on 2014-January-01, 10:40, said:

If so, where in the Laws is this specified?

This is a matter of regulation, rather than law. For example the EBU says:

Quote

It is expected that experienced players will protect themselves in obvious misinformation cases. If such players receive an explanation which is implausible, and they are able to protect themselves by seeking further clarification without putting their side’s interests at risk (e.g. by transmitting unauthorised information or alerting the opposition), failure to do so may prejudice their right to redress.

[pilcaroo]

RMB1, on 2014-January-01, 11:00, said:

If a strong 2♣ is alertable and a natural 2♣ is not alertable, and there was no alert, I think a player in pass-out seat can assume 2♣ is natural.

If a strong 2♣ is not alertable, the player should inquire rather than assume that it is a strong 2♣ opener and responder is asleep.


This is a matter of regulation, rather than law. For example the EBU says:

Thank you very much.
Do you know if there is a similar regulation for the ACBL?

[RMB1]

pilcaroo, on 2014-January-01, 11:12, said:

Do you know if there is a similar regulation for the ACBL?

Many posters write as if the ACBL has some such similar regulation.
I hope this is because there is a regulation;
but some things are just what players/TDs say they are without being written down.

[LH2650]

From the ACBL Alert Procedures:

Players who, by experience or expertise, recognize that their opponents have neglected to Alert a special agreement will be expected to protect themselves.

[pilcaroo]

LH2650, on 2014-January-01, 11:53, said:

From the ACBL Alert Procedures:

Players who, by experience or expertise, recognize that their opponents have neglected to Alert a special agreement will be expected to protect themselves.

Many thanks

[ggwhiz]

LH2650, on 2014-January-01, 11:53, said:

From the ACBL Alert Procedures:

Players who, by experience or expertise, recognize that their opponents have neglected to Alert a special agreement will be expected to protect themselves.

Makes sense. Such an inquiry may raise UI issues but rarely and you will get full protection from those.

[mycroft]

The heading of the Alert Procedure should be required reading for everybody in the ACBL (a once-through of the Alert Procedure, looking for things they play, should also be required, but that's really a pipe dream). I wish we publicised it more. Having said that, here it is:

Quote

• Bridge is not a game of secret messages; the auction belongs to everyone at the table.
  
• Remember that the opponents are entitled to know the agreed meaning of all calls.
  
• The bidding side has an obligation to disclose its agreements according to the procedures established by ACBL.
  
• When asked, the bidding side must give a full explanation of the agreement. Stating the common or popular name of the convention is not sufficient.
  
• The opponents need not ask exactly the "right" question.
  
• Any request for information should be the trigger. Opponents need only indicate the desire for information - all relevant disclosure should be given automatically.
  
• The proper way to ask for information is "please explain."
  
• Players who remember that a call requires an Alert but cannot remember the meaning must still Alert.
  
• In all Alert situations, Tournament Directors should rule with the spirit of the Alert procedure in mind and not simply by the letter of the law.
  
• Players who, by experience or expertise, recognize that their opponents have neglected to Alert a special agreement will be expected to protect themselves.
  
• Adjustments for violations are not automatic. There must have been misinformation. An adjustment will be made only when the misinformation was a direct cause of the damage. Note also that an opponent who actually knows or suspects what is happening, even though not properly informed, may not be entitled to redress if he or she chooses to proceed without clarifying the situation.
  
• When an Alert is given, ASK, do not ASSUME.

[McBruce]

I posted the preamble at our club with the heading "Members of the 'Alertable Police' should note that..." The notice was taken down a few days later by another Director who is in fact the Chief Constable on the force...

[blackshoe]

McBruce, on 2014-January-05, 16:47, said:

I posted the preamble at our club with the heading "Members of the 'Alertable Police' should note that..." The notice was taken down a few days later by another Director who is in fact the Chief Constable on the force...

Put it back up.

[Bbradley62]

blackshoe, on 2014-January-05, 16:59, said:

McBruce, on 2014-January-05, 16:47, said:

I posted the preamble at our club with the heading "Members of the 'Alertable Police' should note that..." The notice was taken down a few days later by another Director who is in fact the Chief Constable on the force...

Put it back up.

Put it back up, replacing your obnoxious heading with "All players should note that..."