[mfa1010]

---

MPs

2♦ = Something weak or a big NT
2♠ = Pass or correct opposite a weak hand
2NT = I have the big NT
3♣ = Puppet stayman

3♣ is alerted, but the alert happens to be slow.
It comes just at the time when east has put his pass card on the table in normal tempo.

Do we have a problem?

Rate My Paranoia ...

[akwoo]

Regulations and history of regulations?

Multi (and particularly multi with a strong option) is generally illegal here, so I have no experience with this particular auction, but there have been changes here on whether 3♣ as puppet stayman is alertable. I believe the current rule here in my corner of ACBL land is that, over a 2N opening, 3♣ as puppet is not alerted, but responses are, and this change is somewhat recent (and might not even be an official change, just an interpretation that may vary regionally).

If there has been a change in regulations "recently" (i.e. within the last 15 years or so) or regional differences in regulation interpretation, that might change my answer.

[nige1]

 mfa1010, on 2014-May-19, 16:48, said:

MPs
2♦ = Something weak or a big NT
2♠ = Pass or correct opposite a weak hand
2NT = I have the big NT
3♣ = Puppet stayman
3♣ is alerted, but the alert happens to be slow.
It comes just at the time when east has put his pass card on the table in normal tempo.
Do we have a problem?
Rate My Paranoia ...

---

Not sure because, now East can change his call, (Unless, perhaps, you suspect that South has good ♣ and hopes to entice a a double of 3♣, by giving East 2 bites at the cherry)

[wank]

i don't understand your complaint

[MrAce]

 wank, on 2014-May-19, 18:45, said:

i don't understand your complaint

I did not read it as a "complaint"
He is just paranoid, and trying to save money by free diagnosis and/or confirmation in BBO instead of paying to a shrink! (joke obviously)

[aguahombre]

The only point I can see about this thread has nothing to do with paranoia.

Over here, where cheapest club Stayman bids themselves are not supposed to be alerted in a NT auction, whether Puppet or not, there are a couple of cases where it feels wrong not to do so.

In the given situation, for instance, it might not be clear to opponents unfamiliar with our system that it is a NT sequence; and although they are unlikely to want to venture into the auction they might very well want to make the traditional lead directing double.

I would rather just alert the damn thing and prevent RHO from having to squirm, ask about the unalerted bid, or whatever.

[Fluffy]

I don't know if it is something specific to my regulations, but puppet stayman is listed as number one convention where alerting helps partner and not the opponents and shouldn't be done (actually alerting the 2NT opening as could have 5 card major is number one). It doesn't matter much, 95% of the players still alert it.

[mfa1010]

2♦ could be multi or both majors/strong or ♠/strong or whatever legal.

International regulations in force, so 3♣ is alertable. But you can assume any conventional bid, the exact sequence is not the point.

South would hate a club lead. Therefore he would hate a thin lead directing double as well. So if he could just catch east napping just a little over 3♣, it would be sweet. East could of course claim to change his pass, when the alert comes, but he will tend not to. Because pass then changed to X will give a lot of info away to the potential declarer, and maybe also because of pride...

[MickyB]

 mfa1010, on 2014-May-20, 00:40, said:

pass then changed to X will give a lot of info away to the potential declarer

Which would be UI to declarer and AI to partner

[mfa1010]

 MickyB, on 2014-May-20, 00:45, said:

Which would be UI to declarer and AI to partner

Yes I agree absolutely.

It is a part of the conspiracy theory that in practice S will get a lead directing double less often, if he "forgets" to alert a conventional bid until after E has bid (passed).

[helene_t]

How does a pass corrected to double differ from a normal double of an aleterted 3♣ bid? Maybe if the initial pass denied a hand suitable for a t/o double of clubs, but a natural club bid would almost never be doubled there. Maybe a double shows clubs regardless of the meaning of 3♣, just more/better clubs if 3♣ was natural, so the pass corrected to double shows a potentially thinner double? I think it's far fetched.

[gordontd]

 mfa1010, on 2014-May-20, 00:40, said:

East could of course claim to change his pass, when the alert comes, but he will tend not to. Because pass then changed to X will give a lot of info away to the potential declarer, and maybe also because of pride...

I see people routinely taking back their original call in situations like this, even if only to re-instate the same Pass after consideration. I'm not sure where pride comes into it, and any information given away is unauthorised for delarer.

[cherdano]

 MickyB, on 2014-May-20, 00:45, said:

Which would be UI to declarer and AI to partner

Does it matter that it is UI to declarer? How likely would the defenders get a ruling in their favour?

[ArtK78]

I don't see the problem.

East would be very unlikely to be entering the auction here if the 3♣ bid was not conventional. If the delayed alert gives East a chance to change his call, he can take advantage of that. Whether the change of call is UI to North/South and AI to West should not matter under these circumstances.

[mikeh]

When one has to choose between assuming incompetence or deliberate wrongdoing, in bridge or in life, one will usually be more often right if one chooses incompetence as the explanation.

Who knows what opener was thinking? The strong multi variant is a rare bird, and many players in that situation would be concentrating on how to bid the hand rather than being instantly aware of their alerting responsibilities.

The Buffalo Springfield said it best: paranoia runs deep, into your heart it will creep.

[mfa1010]

 mikeh, on 2014-May-20, 09:21, said:

When one has to choose between assuming incompetence or deliberate wrongdoing, in bridge or in life, one will usually be more often right if one chooses incompetence as the explanation.

Yes that is also my life philosophy.

[gszes]

I have seen some of the most egregious violations of the rules of "ethical"
play perpetrated by some of the strongest players I have ever seen. I would never
consider asking any of them to play bridge but I freely admit that there is at
least a bit of paranoia in my thinking when such situations occur. We teach and
practice knowing what to expect from partner over and over and over and I feel
such delays in alerts (when needed even if I disagree with the rules) should
always be dealt with harshly by directors when experts are involved. We freely
acknowledge that both partners are responsible for knowing their system and that
includes when to alert. If one partner gives an erroneous explanation to a systemic
bid they can easily be penalized the same should happen with a failure to alert.

The fact is that the 2N bidder should have taken time to mentally prepare for the
follow ups to their 2n bid pure and simple.

[kenberg]

Here is how I see the problem, but if the laws require the alert then you are stuck.

A. The most likely reason for the slow alert is that the alerted had forgotten that 3♣ here was Puppet.
B. If he had forgotten, it is possible his partner had forgotten or at least would not be certain w/o an alert.
C. Thanks to the alert, everyone is confidently on the same page.

Of course there is possibility D: If they have no agreement, or really do not remember their agreement, alerter has just explained to his partner how his next call is to be understood. Lots of luck on getting anywhere with that.

Fluffy noted earlier that alerting Puppet is far more likely to help the Puppeteers than the defenders, and I agree. But we go by the rules. The rules say alert, he alerted, albeit slowly.

I don't do psychological profiles.

[Zelandakh]

Silly question but everyone seems to be assuming that 3♣ would be alerted here if Puppet and not is regular Stayman. Is there any NBO where this is actually the alerting regulation? This is quite different from the auction after a strong 2♣ opening and 2NT rebid in which many countries regulate that Stayman should not be alerted. Certainly my reading of the ACBL regulations would be that 3♣ is alertable here for any non-natural meaning. And I suspect this is true for the majority of places where this might occur.

[helene_t]

Regulatory issues aside, I thought the non-alert meant that South was in doubt as to whether 3♣ was natural, not whether it was one sort of stayman or another.

FWIW, Stayman is always alertable in Denmark.