[BLML] Alerting a BOOT [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

Sven Pran svenpran at online.no
Fri Nov 1 08:30:26 CET 2013


Norway seems to having selected a (slightly) different approach:

(My translation): [
] Different environments have different expectations to
the meaning of calls. Thus basing alerts on “common/unusual” has therefore
proven unsatisfactory. Regulations are now mainly based on
“conventional/natural”.  

 

The main rule is that all conventional calls shall be alerted [a few
examples]:

- “natural” calls containing essential understanding beyond what follows
from the call being “natural”. 

- “natural” calls with reasonable doubt about the demand level.

- PASS when conventional [e.g. expecting a subsequent call other than PASS
from partner] 

- DOUBLE and REDOUBLE when conventional [i.e. not solely for penalty]

 

So for instance both a transfer bid and the response to this shall be
alerted as neither promises at least some required minimum length in the
denomination named in the call.

 

Fra: blml-bounces at rtflb.org [mailto:blml-bounces at rtflb.org] På vegne av
Richard HILLS
Sendt: 31. oktober 2013 22:53
Til: Bridge Laws Mailing List
Emne: Re: [BLML] Alerting a BOOT [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

 

UNOFFICIAL

 

>>.....

>>ABF Alert regulation requires some “purely natural” calls to be Alerted.

>>.....

 

>So do Belgian regulations (no jokes, please).

>For example: transfers to majors over 1NT need not be alerted, which 

>means that 1NT - (pass) - 2He must be alerted if natural.

>Seems far more logical to me than alerting the transfer, a meaning which 

>is even taught to beginners in the Belgian standard beginner system(s).

>I consider that a good alerting regulation should be one in which 

>beginners who have learnt the standard national system, need never alert 

>and would not be surprised at the meaning of a non-alerted call.

> 

>Herman.

 

Definitions:

 

Alert — A notification, whose form may be specified by the Regulating

Authority, to the effect that ++opponents may be in need of an

explanation++.

 

Aussie Regulating Authority:

 

3.2.2 Two classes of natural calls must be alerted (unless they are

self-alerting), viz.

 

(a) The call is natural, but you have an agreement by which your

call is forcing or non-forcing in a way that ++your opponents are

unlikely to expect++.

.....

 

[e.g. 1 banana – X – XX – Pass = unexpected strength, not expected

balanced weakness]

 

(b) The call is natural, but its meaning is affected by other

agreements, which ++your opponents are unlikely to expect++.

.....

UNOFFICIAL

 

 


--------------------------------------------------------------------
Important Notice: If you have received this email by mistake, please advise
the sender and delete the message and attachments immediately. This email,
including attachments, may contain confidential, sensitive, legally
privileged
and/or copyright information. Any review, retransmission, dissemination
or other use of this information by persons or entities other than the
intended recipient is prohibited. DIBP respects your privacy and has
obligations under the Privacy Act 1988. The official departmental privacy
policy can be viewed on the department's website at
<http://www.immi.gov.au> www.immi.gov.au. See:
http://www.immi.gov.au/functional/privacy.htm


---------------------------------------------------------------------

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.rtflb.org/pipermail/blml/attachments/20131101/cadf9c75/attachment-0001.html 


More information about the Blml mailing list