[BLML] Do Alert rules need to change ? [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

Nigel Guthrie g3 at nige1.com
Mon Mar 19 22:31:36 CET 2012


[Sven Pran]

Opening bids in the range 1NT - 2Sp are never to be alerted, but the 
opener's partner shall immediately (without being asked) "announce" the 
meaning of that bid. The announcement shall include all important features 
of the bid. With for instance ("natural") 1NT opening bids this includes the 
HCP range and possible special distributional features like "may contain a 
singleton" or "may contain a 5-card major" etc.

[Nige1]

I agree with what Sven says but go a little further...

- For *all* partner's calls (not just 2-openers), you *announce* the meaning 
(*No alert, no question*).

- Each table has a card with a matrix of common explanations (e.g. Natural, 
Take-out, Penalty, Negative, Lead-directing, Responsive, Competitive, 
Action, Support, Game-try, Weak, Sign-off, Constructive, Invitational, 
Transfer, FQ, FG, Transgfer, relay, Asking, Splinter, Fit, Mixed, and so on, 
and so on). When partner makes a call with a simple explanation, instead of 
announcing, you point to the appropriate cell.

- Opponents can stipulate whether or not you announce calls. If opponents 
switch off announcing and you still announce, alert, or whatever, then the 
director treats it as unauthorised information.

- If opponents have switched off announcements, at the end of the auction, 
(i) The declaring side must explain their calls, unprompted (ii) On request, 
the defending side must also explain their calls.

- An opponent may ask "from your partner's calls, what do you know about 
partner's hand". Then you must collate all the information from partner's 
calls into a description of likely shape, strength, etc.

- Each player in a partnership must present for perusal identical cards in a 
universal standard format: an enhanced version of the current WBF card.

IMO, such a law

- Improves disclosure.

- Is simpler than current laws and regulations.

- Is easier for players to understand and directors to implement.

- Reduces unauthorised information (If, like many players I know,  you would 
normally take the "switch-off" option, it would virtually eliminate UI from 
alerts, alert-failures, questions, and answers).

- Saves time (waiting for alerts, questions, and so on).

- Could replace all local regulations on disclosure.

- Produces a more level playing-field.  it is human nature for RAs to 
exploit the opportunity given them by current laws, to concoct 
alert/system-card/other regulations that give local players a significant 
advantage over foreigners and strangers.



 



More information about the Blml mailing list