[awm]

Partner and I have agreed to play top and bottom cuebids, so for example 1♣-2♣ shows diamonds and spades. This treatment is pretty non-mainstream in the USA, where most people play Michaels cuebids (so 1♣-2♣ for majors). However, the alert regulations are quite clear that most cuebids (including this one) are not alertable.

Playing in an NABC+ (national championship) event, should partner and I alert our cuebids? If trying to be ethical, should we follow the laws as they are written, or should we alert bids that are technically non-alertable so as not to get an unfair advantage over opponents who might assume Michaels without asking or looking at a CC?

In theory it's possible to get in trouble for alerting a non-alertable bid, but in practice this will almost never happen.

[ralph23]

I would alert it to avoid all the lawyering I will have to do if I don't alert it and someone gets huffy about the non-alerting.

I cannot imagine getting into trouble by following this policy, but my imagination has been known to be limited.

[hrothgar]

awm, on Aug 1 2007, 09:29 PM, said:

Partner and I have agreed to play top and bottom cuebids, so for example 1♣-2♣ shows diamonds and spades. This treatment is pretty non-mainstream in the USA, where most people play Michaels cuebids (so 1♣-2♣ for majors). However, the alert regulations are quite clear that most cuebids (including this one) are not alertable.

Playing in an NABC+ (national championship) event, should partner and I alert our cuebids? If trying to be ethical, should we follow the laws as they are written, or should we alert bids that are technically non-alertable so as not to get an unfair advantage over opponents who might assume Michaels without asking or looking at a CC?

In theory it's possible to get in trouble for alerting a non-alertable bid, but in practice this will almost never happen.

Almost makes me think back fondly to the old "special alert".

First and foremost, I think the Memphis's opinion on this one is more important than ours. I'd ask them and hope that you get one answer.

Personally, i think that the correct course of action depends on the nature of the event. If I were playing in a team event, I would pre-alert the opponents and ask them whether they would like you to alert or not.

If I were playing in a pairs event with short rounds, I would (probably) speak to the director before hand and ask for clarification. If I were forced to chose a course of action with no guidance, I would adhere to the letter or the law and not alert.

[helene_t]

IRL follow the regulations. Online active ethics.

[jtfanclub]

awm, on Aug 1 2007, 01:29 PM, said:

Partner and I have agreed to play top and bottom cuebids, so for example 1♣-2♣ shows diamonds and spades.

Pre-alert. It's safe, it's easy, and while somebody might whine, it's clearly legal.

Other than that, yeah, ask the director before you start, what else can you do?

[pclayton]

I've asked directors about this. Even though a direct cue bid doesn't require an alert, the bid has a special meaning. In Overcall Structure, the cue shows the two touching suits to the opening bid and a very wide range. The director told me that alerting can never be wrong in a case like this.

Put it this way. Regardless of what the regulations say, wouldn't you want to know about your opponent's agreements?

[pclayton]

jtfanclub, on Aug 1 2007, 10:46 AM, said:

awm, on Aug 1 2007, 01:29 PM, said:

Partner and I have agreed to play top and bottom cuebids, so for example 1♣-2♣ shows diamonds and spades.

Pre-alert. It's safe, it's easy, and while somebody might whine, it's clearly legal.

Other than that, yeah, ask the director before you start, what else can you do?

Pre-alerting technically only applies to midchart agreements and very special carding agreements, like low from xx.

Mind you, as a courtesy, I'll prealert overcall structure, since the 1N overcall is tricky to defend against if you don't have good agreements. I'll also pre-alert our 2N opening for the minors.

[scoob]

acbl alert procedures

Quote

EXAMPLE: 1♦-2♦
If the 2 bid shows the majors (Michaels), clubs and spades (top/bottom) or some other two-suiter (not including diamonds, no Alert is required.

edit to add:

acbl alert definitions

Quote

Alerts: Many previously Alertable calls no longer require an Alert. However, when in doubt Alert (there is no penalty for Alerting unnecessarily but there may be one for failing to Alert when one is required).

this actually surprised me...

[awm]

This isn't a Laws question BTW. The regulations are clear that the cuebid is not alertable. Regardless of how confused the opponents get, no director or committee will rule against us because we didn't alert a non-alertable bid.

It's possible that we could get in trouble by alerting, particularly if I forget the meaning of 2♣ and partner's alert "wakes me up" to what has occurred, but in practice this is never going to be an issue because partner and I aren't in the habit of forgetting our methods.

It's really more of an ethical question: "what should we do when the letter of the laws seems to conflict with active ethics?"

[TimG]

awm, on Aug 1 2007, 01:53 PM, said:

This isn't a Laws question BTW. The regulations are clear that the cuebid is not alertable. Regardless of how confused the opponents get, no director or committee will rule against us because we didn't alert a non-alertable bid.

It's possible that we could get in trouble by alerting, particularly if I forget the meaning of 2♣ and partner's alert "wakes me up" to what has occurred, but in practice this is never going to be an issue because partner and I aren't in the habit of forgetting our methods.

It's really more of an ethical question: "what should we do when the letter of the laws seems to conflict with active ethics?"

Ask the director of the event you are playing in whether it is OK for you to alert. If he says "yes", then alert; if he says "no" then don't alert.

[keylime]

I'm borderline on the fence since, since we play an offshoot of the Overcall Structure. I voted for the "cuebids alert themselves" mentality, but I'm considering adding a tag line to our canape pre-alert to address this, because we play specific 2 suiters.

[ArcLight]

>It's really more of an ethical question: "what should we do when the letter of the laws seems to conflict with active ethics?"


I would just pre-alert.


What would you do if you played agains't a pair and they made a Michaels cue bid.
You bid accordingly. And later found out it wasn't Michales. You only assumed it was, because thats what everyone uses.
Should you ask the see their card on certain types of bids? Does that create an ethical problem? It also slows the game down a bit.

Lets say you don't alert. Won't most people assume its Michaels. Lets say they get "burned". Won't they be annoyed.

I think not pre-alerting has the potential to create ill feelings. Whiel pre-alerting is a basic courtesy.

[paulg]

I alert them in the ACBL but I only play at the Summer Nationals (elsewhere it is mandatory to alert).

David Stevenson alerts them in the ACBL.

It's hard to see how anyone can be damaged by the alert. It the regulations are ambiguous, as they are here (do not alert cue bids, alert unusual stuff), then taking the option that is most likely to benefit the opponents seems sensible and defensible.

Paul

[cherdano]

I would definitely alert them.

[han]

I don't feel strongly about alerting or not. In ACBL land the cuebid is considered self-alerting, so opponents are recommended to ask about your bid. When I play Rubens advances I do alert even though it is not required.

Prealerting doesn't make sense, this is not a convention that requires preparation. If you think that it is so special that the opponents should be informed, just alert.

[pbleighton]

I would alert. The ACBL states in their alerting regs that when in doubt alert, and that you can never be penalized for over-alerting. I would not pre-alert, as most people hate it, and want you to alert instead.

Quote

Pre-alerting technically only applies to midchart agreements and very special carding agreements, like low from xx.

Phil, you also have to pre-alert any fundamentally unfamiliar systems, such as very light openers, opening at the two level with Qxxxx or worse or the three level with Qxxxxx or worse, or canape systems.

Peter

[blackshoe]

I would not alert it. I would not pre-alert it. I might ask opponents, at the end of the auction, if I am declaring, if they would like an explanation of our auction.

Is "active ethics" (whatever that means) not applicable in real life?

[pbleighton]

Quote

Is "active ethics" (whatever that means) not applicable in real life?

It's as applicable as you choose it to be.

Peter

[TimG]

pbleighton, on Aug 1 2007, 06:30 PM, said:

Phil, you also have to pre-alert any fundamentally unfamiliar systems, such as very light openers, opening at the two level with Qxxxx or worse or the three level with Qxxxxx or worse, or canape systems.

Is it true that you have to pre-alert canapé in ACBL events?

[TimG]

blackshoe, on Aug 1 2007, 07:07 PM, said:

I would not alert it. I would not pre-alert it. I might ask opponents, at the end of the auction, if I am declaring, if they would like an explanation of our auction.

At the end of the auction is likely too late. After 1♣-2♣, I would assume majors and think that both 2♥ and 2♠ were cue-bids. If the actual agreement is spades and diamonds, then my bidding may well be confused.