Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Wayne Burrows
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It is completely wrong to suggest that someone who complies with the laws is not acting in a sportsman like manner. Complying with the laws is ultimately sportsmanship.
Aug. 28
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Because 4 is more hideous.
Aug. 28
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
And many more would not alert according to the poll in the opening post.
Aug. 28
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@Frances “All I would take from this is that if I played 2♥ as natural non-forcing in this sequence, I would be certain to alert it in future.”

Why? The regulations still say that non-conventional bids should not (be alerted). The WBF has still not designated this a special partnership understanding as per Law 40(b) and why would they it is easily understood by anyone playing a world championship at the very least.

The ruling is directly contrary to their own regulations.
Aug. 28
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
David there is a false equivalence with a procedure that is mandated by the RA such as the form of an announcement and whether a player varies which hand the cards are held in.

The cheating methods that have been discovered are as far as I am aware mostly very simplistic. There is an array of things that are not mandated or a subject to variation that could be used to send signals. Just because those things exist does not mean that we should allow players to vary from what is mandated in other aspects of the game.
Aug. 27
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You conflate telling your opponents what you play and alerting. Alerting is not full disclosure. It is merely a mechanism that prompts for disclosure.

On the other hand a non-alert is also not full disclosure it only says in the case of the WBF policy that the bid is in most situations natural or rather not conventional.

If you assume additional information from an alert or failure to alert then that is your problem if you turn out to be wrong.
Aug. 27
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Patrick does a transfer need an alert or an announcement in France?
Aug. 27
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As Richard said if players are free to vary their announcement or any other procedure from what is stipulated then it is ridiculously easy to cheat.

A binary signal like “hearts” or anything other than “hearts” could convey enough information to give a significant advantage. Anything other than “hearts” has potential to convey much more information than just a binary message.
Aug. 27
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Just why should you not have to announce 15-17 but its okay to insist other ranges be announced?
Aug. 27
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
David your conclusion does not follow from the premise.

Just because 2h unalerted shows hearts does mean that this particular opponent knows that.

In view of the alert regulations a natural non jump response to 1nt would seem by any plain reading to not require an alert. A properly prepared player would know that.
Aug. 27
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Most natural responses to partner's takeout double would need an alert as not forcing.

That seems wrong.
Aug. 26
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This is not a special partnership understanding.
Aug. 26
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The facts as described if taken at face value leave me feeling the Dutch were cheated out of their medal.
Aug. 26
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This is absolutely clear.

“Non-forcing jump changes of suit responses to opening bids or overcalls, and nonforcing new suit responses by an unpassed hand to opening bids of one of a suit.”

The distinction between “responses to opening bids” and “to opening bids of one of a suit” means that a 1NT opening is clearly not included. The only sensible inference is that the intention is that non-forcing non-jump new suit responses to 1NT do not need an alert.
Aug. 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We require alerts at our clubs.

Even if not, hopefully some time they will play tournaments and then get ruled against for not alerting if this agreement is alertable and they still play it.
Aug. 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We had the same situation this weekend. Not under WBF rules. I opened an 8-10 1NT and partner bid 2 which I did not alert. After the hand the opponents claimed that 2 needed an alert. The NZ Bridge chief director eventually decreed that 2 was not alertable.

If 2M is alertable then thousands of beginners who do not learn transfers will need to start alerting.
Aug. 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What did he think a non-alerted 2 bid showed?

And what was their system agreement about what double of a natural 2 bid showed?

Seriously this is the doubler's and his partner's own misunderstanding.

If the WBF are going to rule this way then they need to say what an unalerted 2 bid can be assumed to mean.
Aug. 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
1 a round earlier is much better.
Aug. 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I completely disagree.

Take for example a standard American 1C. The percentage of balanced hands (with short club if you like) compared with unbalanced hands with long clubs is a matter for general bridge knowledge.

That is if I tell you that I open the balanced hands with or without short club and long club unbalanced hands 1C then it is your problem and preparation to determine the frequencies.

I use 1C only for illustrative purposes the same principle applies to any other opening.

The only exception would be if a system has two bids or calls for the same hand. Then I think I may be entitled to information about the frequency or criteria for each opening.
Aug. 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Also undiscussed is not a sufficient answer when the partnership has an implicit understanding.
Aug. 21
.

Bottom Home Top