[jillybean]

ACBL

1♣ (P) 2♠

Is this alertable if weak, if strong?

[jh51]

The ACBL convention card has a box for "weak jump shifts not in competition" in the other conventions area. It is red, meaning it is indeed alertable. In competition (after a double or overcall) it does not requitre an alert. Strong jump shifts are not, as far as I know, alertable.

[blackshoe]

Weak jump shifts and invitational jump shifts, not in competition, require an alert. Strong (GF) jump shifts do not.

The card, btw, is not definitive. Should there be a discrepancy between what the card says and what the regulation says, the regulation governs.

[ArtK78]

I believe that weak jump shifts, both in and out of competition, are alertable. Strong jump shifts are not alertable.

[blackshoe]

Weak jump shifts in competition do not require an alert.

[campboy]

From the alert procedures:

Quote

Game-forcing natural jump shifts are not Alertable. Other jump shifts (either conventional or natural and weak or intermediate) not in competition must be Alerted. A natural jump shift in competition does not require an Alert regardless of strength.

[jh51]

blackshoe, on 2011-June-16, 09:48, said:

The card, btw, is not definitive. Should there be a discrepancy between what the card says and what the regulation says, the regulation governs.

Of course, but it is a pretty good rule of thumb that if a bid or convention is in red on the card, its alertable.

[blackshoe]

jh51, on 2011-June-16, 13:34, said:

Of course, but it is a pretty good rule of thumb that if a bid or convention is in red on the card, its alertable.

We had a pair here who had been using the same cards for something like ten years. The, um, color scheme had some errors in it, of which they were blissfully unaware. When it was pointed out that the alert regulation had changed (once), they of course complained of "too frequent" changes. They were pretty cards, though, all laminated and everything.

[jh51]

blackshoe, on 2011-June-16, 14:24, said:

We had a pair here who had been using the same cards for something like ten years. The, um, color scheme had some errors in it, of which they were blissfully unaware. When it was pointed out that the alert regulation had changed (once), they of course complained of "too frequent" changes. They were pretty cards, though, all laminated and everything.

I understand. I started playing duplciate about 30 years ago, but after about 7 years of playing regularly I stopped for about 20 years. When I took up the game again, even though I knew the new regulations I would sometimes alert things that were no longer alertable. (Most commonly I would alert negative doubles.)

[jillybean]

Thanks, I am finding that the weak jump shifts tend not to be alerted around here or atleast not at the lower levels of the game. When I commented on the lack of an alert I got the inevitable response "of course it's not alertable, it's standard".

[blackshoe]

Everything I play is standard. Everything you play is weird.

[barmar]

blackshoe, on 2011-June-16, 14:24, said:

We had a pair here who had been using the same cards for something like ten years. The, um, color scheme had some errors in it, of which they were blissfully unaware. When it was pointed out that the alert regulation had changed (once), they of course complained of "too frequent" changes. They were pretty cards, though, all laminated and everything.

Of course, any reference to the CC in this context must be to the current ACBL CC. AFAIK there are no discrepancies between the current card and the current alert regulations, so it's pretty safe to use it as a guideline.

As well, the reference must be to ACBL's true CC. There was a version of the Lee Edwards ACBL Convention Card program a few years ago that had the color coding of the lead from a small doubleton wrong, it showed high-low as red. But the official ACBL CC had it correct.

[blackshoe]

It was my understanding that Lee Edwards' program is, or at least was, "official", although I do remember when he had that bit wrong. <shrug>