[Phil]

Opponents silent;

1♦ - 2♦*
2♥

2♦ is limit + (alerted)
2♥ is a stopper

Re: 2♥ - Alert? or Not?

[h2osmom]

I think no alert. Many who play inverted minors play 2 level bids as stoppers, and I haven't heard them alerted. Maybe I am wrong though.

[blackshoe]

Depends on the jurisdiction. In the ACBL, I don't think so.

[Phil]

I thought "no alert", because 2♥ is more or less natural. However, since I would make the call on xxx AK xxx KQxxx, I'm not sure.

[wank]

sounds alertable to me, unless there's a particular acbl regulation saying you don't need to

[blackshoe]

Hm. Well, that's not natural. Since there's nothing specific about this call in the regulation, I'd say, having now read the reg again, that it falls under the default "alert all artificial calls". I don't think I've ever seen anybody do it, though.

[aguahombre]

Since we also play inv+ for the single raise, it has never mattered to us whether 2H was alerted or not. If the auction gets more complicated we ask at the end.

But it also never occurred to us not to alert 2H. It means so much more than just a heart stopper, and certainly could be fewer than 3 cards. Whether it actually is alertable might be of importance to someone else not familiar with common follow-ups.

[mjj29]

aguahombre, on Jun 18 2010, 05:10 PM, said:

But it also never occurred to us not to alert 2H. It means so much more than just a heart stopper, and certainly could be fewer than 3 cards. Whether it actually is alertable might be of importance to someone else not familiar with common follow-ups.

"could be fewer than three" is certainly the general regulation in the EBU and there are no relevant exceptions to that, so I would expect it to be alerted if you would make it on AK tight.

[bluejak]

I do not think that this has anything to do with inverted minors per se. If you are not playing them, and the bidding goes 1♦ 2♦ 2♥ surely that is just as much a stopper?

My understanding for the last forty years is that after suit agreement in a minor a new suit shows a stopper and no-one has ever alerted it. I would be surprised if it was a doubleton, but obviously there will be hands where nothing else suits.

I think the reason no-one ever alerts it is that it feels like a natural bid. If your partner were to bid this way, you would not think to yourself "I wonder if he has a doubleton?". You would be unlikely to care. What you would think is that he controls hearts for no-trumps so now you can worry about the black suits.

The possibility of a doubleton is low and not generally considered. But technically that possibility makes it alertable in England/Wales, and possibly in the ACBL as well.

[jeremy69]

Quote

technically that possibility makes it alertable in England/Wales

Presumably "technically" is a weasel word meaning it doesn't matter much. In forms of Precision where I've played this it has been alerted although it is infrequently two but I think the regulation is completely clear that it should be.

[bluejak]

"Weasel word" of course is an effort to provide a different feel. No, I believe in alerting being helpful: not only do I think it does not matter, more importantly I think it very unhelpful to alert standard methds that are basically natural even if technically not. "Weasel word" tries to suggest a different effect.

What connectin has this to do with a Precision 1♦? Since when has that been natural? I do not understand the point in comparing unlike cases.

[peachy]

Everybody (and I know you know what I mean) plays this. Alerting will just confuse and prompt a question, expecting the bid to show something other than "some hearts with stopper and could even be 4-card suit". By ACBL alert regulation, my understanding is it is not alertable and I never saw anybody alert it.

In contrast, 1D-2D-2S just BARELY might warrant an alert, if it is played as "something in spades or a spade suit, tends to deny heart stopper" because it includes a message that is not related to spades, but nobody alerts this either, and why should they when everybody plays it and the logic of the auction is available to all four players.

[blackshoe]

Peachy, I won't give you the onerous task of going back through the thread to find the message in which I said that IMO the ACBL regulation does require that opener's major suit rebid after an inverted minor raise be alerted, because the bid is not (by the regulation's definition) natural, and the case is not specifically addressed to exempt it from the general provision that non-natural calls be alerted.

There's no provision in the regulation for not alerting calls that "everybody plays" either.

[peachy]

blackshoe, on Jun 19 2010, 10:35 AM, said:

Peachy, I won't give you the onerous task of going back through the thread to find the message in which I said that IMO the ACBL regulation does require that opener's major suit rebid after an inverted minor raise be alerted, because the bid is not (by the regulation's definition) natural, and the case is not specifically addressed to exempt it from the general provision that non-natural calls be alerted.

There's no provision in the regulation for not alerting calls that "everybody plays" either.

This is conflict with 1S-2S-3H [HSGT] which is not alertable. I trust that you are more familiar with the regulation than I am.
With "everybody" I was getting at the fact there will be no damage for non-alert even if by ACBL regulation it would be alertable.

[FrancesHinden]

I think it's alertable if it might be a doubleton.

And I'm sorry to disappoint a number of posters, but I play all of

1C - 2C - 2H
1C - 2C - 2S
1D - 2D - 2S

as natural, promising a 4+ card suit

If I were playing weak NT, 4-card majors and not inverted raises I would also play all the
1m - 2m; 2M
sequences

as natural

[blackshoe]

Okay, Frances, that's how you play it. But there's several million other bridge players around, and they may not all play it the way you do.

Peachy, iirc, the difference is that HSGTs are explicitly mentioned in the alert regulation as not requiring an alert.

[RMB1]

FrancesHinden, on Jun 19 2010, 06:12 PM, said:

And I'm sorry to disappoint a number of posters, but I play all of

1C - 2C - 2H
1C - 2C - 2S
1D - 2D - 2S

as natural, promising a 4+ card suit

Not just me then.

[aguahombre]

That style doesn't disappoint me. I would encourage it

I don't understand looking for a fit in a major which as already been denied, or bidding an inverted minor raise with a four card major suit. But I think the opponents should use this approach.

[peachy]

blackshoe, on Jun 19 2010, 12:45 PM, said:

Okay, Frances, that's how you play it. But there's several million other bridge players around, and they may not all play it the way you do.

Peachy, iirc, the difference is that HSGTs are explicitly mentioned in the alert regulation as not requiring an alert.

My gut feeling is that they forgot to list this one explicitly also as not alertable. But as said, I am not going to argue further. I trust you know the regulation probably better than I do. Perhaps advice from ACBL might be in order, unless of course you are already 100% sure it is alertable.

[Phil]

aguahombre, on Jun 19 2010, 01:06 PM, said:

I don't understand looking for a fit in a major which as already been denied, or bidding an inverted minor raise with a four card major suit. But I think the opponents should use this approach.

Why? Bidding an inverted 2♣ that may have a 4cM is a perfectly reasonable approach that many play. I think it works especially well when 1♣ is sh¤rt.