[Coelacanth]

A pair approached me after tonight's club game (ACBL, field of mixed quality) and described the following auction to me. I'm not sure of the vulnerability.

---

4♣ was Gerber, and was understood as such by both East and West. East's 4♦ bid (which may actually have been 4♥; the NS players didn't make this clear to me) was some kind of ace-showing response.

The fact that 4♣ was Gerber did not come to light for NS until after the hand had been played; it was not alerted at any time.

In the discussion after the hand (which I was not present for), EW maintained that they had been told by several directors that 4♣ Gerber is not alertable. NS were a bit put out by the failure to alert, but were not claiming damage in any way.

Questions:

1) As I read the ACBL alert procedure, this 4♣ should require an immediate alert. It's alertable because it's not over a natural notrump call; it's not a delayed alert because it is on the first round of the auction. Am I missing something?

2) There was no damage on this particular board. Say, for example, South could make a lead-directing double of 4♦. If 4♠ makes on a heart lead but goes down on a diamond lead in this scenario, would you adjust? Keep in mind the context of EW having been told that their auction is not alertable.

[aguahombre]

In the ACBL Alert Procedures document on their site we find this:

"3) ACE ASKING BIDS

4NT Blackwood (any variety over suits) and 4 Gerber (any variety over notrump) and expected responses thereto do not require an Alert of any kind. All other ace-asking bids and responses require an Alert..."

This seems clear to me. We have no idea in what context E/W were told Gerber was not alertable; but unless it is over NoTrump, or is a delay alert it is alertable at the time the bid is made. Delay alerts above 3NT start with opener's second call, and that hasn't happened yet in the given case.

For the second issue, if there is damage it is not relevant whether the OS has been given bad information previously. It is not a matter of intent, but rather result.

NOS states there was no damage; the director gets to decide that. The players can only state whether they believe there was damage, and why.

[blackshoe]

It's entirely possible these bidders were given correct information about when Gerber does not require an alert, and simply misunderstood or misremembered. It's also entirely possible that they were given bad information. It doesn't matter. In this auction, 4♣ (and the 4♦ or 4♥ response to it, whichever it was, although that one is to be delayed) requires an alert. One was not provided. I would apply Law 40B4 and adjust the score if there was damage. I would issue a PP(Warning) to the OS, instructing them to alert this use of Gerber in future.

[Cascade]

To me the bottom line should be were the East West agreements equally available to each side?

No they weren't.

Therefore east west have not done enough to make their agreements known.

This is what the alert chart says under alertable:

Quote

Ace-asking calls and responses at or below the level of 3NT or any opening ace-asking call and response

Delayed Alerts
Ace-asking calls and responses above the level of 3NT beginning with opener’s second call except for those listed under not Alertable

under no alert:

Quote

Over suits, 4NT ace-asking and responses
Over notrump, 4C ace-asking and responses

In the Alert Procedures it says:

Quote

Pre-Alerts are designed to act as an early warning of any unusual methods for which the opponents may need to prepare.

To me Gerber in response to a takeout double crosses the threshold of unusual methods for which the opponents may need to prepare.

and also from the alert procedures

Quote

4NT Blackwood (any variety over suits) and 4 Gerber (any variety over notrump) and expected responses thereto do not require an Alert of any kind. All other ace-asking bids and responses require an Alert, but some of these Alerts must be "delayed."

Ace-asking bids at the level of 3NT or below and usages on the first round (other than Blackwood and Gerber as described above), require an immediate Alert. Unusual ace-asking bids above the level of 3NT starting with opener's second turn to call require a delayed Alert.

and

Quote

Once the auction has progressed to the point that the opening bidder has had the opportunity to make a second call, conventional calls at the four level or higher are not Alerted until the auction is over.

There doesn't seem to be an explicit mention but it seems clear from the context that artificial bids on the first round of the auction do need an alert.

If not on the first round then it would require a delayed alert.

It may also require a prealert if sufficiently unusual.

[Coelacanth]

OK, thanks everyone, I just was wondering if I was losing my mind.

I was not called to this table and asked for a ruling; the NS pair approached me after the session just to clarify whether an alert is required.

When I next encounter this EW pair I may bring this up with them.

[jeffford76]

Coelacanth, on 2011-December-19, 14:08, said:

Keep in mind the context of EW having been told that their auction is not alertable.

If a pair fails to alert in an auction where the rules require an alert, it doesn't matter what they've been previously told.