[Shugart23]

Pre-announced to the opponents that we play canape, Bidding goes : 1H-(1S)-X-P-P-P...…….My partner is the Opener, My double is alerted and explained as I am at least 3-3 in the Minors (sort of a negative double). When Partner leaves my double in, it is obvious she has Spades...….This inference would be true whether we were playing Precision or Standard American and is not specific to canape...…..so should I have alerted her Pass and said she is at least 4-5 in Hearts and Spades respectively or isn't it obvious and therefore not alertable?

Thank you

[Cyberyeti]

 Shugart23, on 2018-August-03, 11:01, said:

Pre-announced to the opponents that we play canape, Bidding goes : 1H-(1S)-X-P-P-P...…….My partner is the Opener, My double is alerted and explained as I am at least 3-3 in the Minors (sort of a negative double). When Partner leaves my double in, it is obvious she has Spades...….This inference would be true whether we were playing Precision or Standard American and is not specific to canape...…..so should I have alerted her Pass and said she is at least 4-5 in Hearts and Spades respectively or isn't it obvious and therefore not alertable?

Thank you

Some people don't canape both majors (we didn't the only partner I ever played canape with). I presume you alerted 1♥ (if the alerting laws are the same as here), and in that case it's pretty obvious what the pass shows. You should also say less than however many hearts when describing the X as it may not be clear whether this is 3 or 4.

[Shugart23]

 Cyberyeti, on 2018-August-03, 15:14, said:

Some people don't canape both majors (we didn't the only partner I ever played canape with). I presume you alerted 1♥ (if the alerting laws are the same as here), and in that case it's pretty obvious what the pass shows. You should also say less than however many hearts when describing the X as it may not be clear whether this is 3 or 4.

No, the 1H bid is not alertable under ACBL rules...….Unless things have changed recently, the 2nd suit bid is what is alertable (presumably to remind opponents that the second suit bid is at least as long as the first suit bid)

[Cyberyeti]

 Shugart23, on 2018-August-03, 16:13, said:

No, the 1H bid is not alertable under ACBL rules...….Unless things have changed recently, the 2nd suit bid is what is alertable (presumably to remind opponents that the second suit bid is at least as long as the first suit bid)

OK, unless it's changed over here (been a long time since I canaped), you alert the first bid "may have longer ..." and then if you make a bid of a second suit that isn't longer you alert that.

[pescetom]

 Shugart23, on 2018-August-03, 16:13, said:

No, the 1H bid is not alertable under ACBL rules...….Unless things have changed recently, the 2nd suit bid is what is alertable (presumably to remind opponents that the second suit bid is at least as long as the first suit bid)

Then I assume that the pre-announcement is obligatory? Opponents have a right to know in time that the second suit can not be shorter.

[barmar]

 pescetom, on 2018-August-04, 14:46, said:

Then I assume that the pre-announcement is obligatory? Opponents have a right to know in time that the second suit can not be shorter.

Yes. From the ACBL Alert Procedures:

Quote

Things that need to be pre-Alerted include:
...
Systems which may be unfamiliar to opponents, such as Canapé, Superchart or Mid-chart methods.

[sanst]

 Shugart23, on 2018-August-03, 11:01, said:

Pre-announced to the opponents that we play canape, Bidding goes : 1H-(1S)-X-P-P-P...…….My partner is the Opener, My double is alerted and explained as I am at least 3-3 in the Minors (sort of a negative double). When Partner leaves my double in, it is obvious she has Spades...….This inference would be true whether we were playing Precision or Standard American and is not specific to canape...…..so should I have alerted her Pass and said she is at least 4-5 in Hearts and Spades respectively or isn't it obvious and therefore not alertable?

Thank you

Whether it’s obligatory is dependent on the jurisdiction you’re in, over here in Holland it certainly is. But I would alert the pass. Your opponents might not immediately understand that your partner has 4+♥ and 5+♠, even if you explained before what canapé is. Alerting isn’t just an obligation, it has a practical purpose, viz. make sure that your opponents are aware that a call might have a meaning that’s different from what they expect, which might be the case here. Besides, it is no trouble to pull the card from the box, is it? So try to avoid discussions about alertability, but alert if you think it’s the right thing to do.

[Shugart23]

 sanst, on 2018-August-05, 02:34, said:

Whether it’s obligatory is dependent on the jurisdiction you’re in, over here in Holland it certainly is. But I would alert the pass. Your opponents might not immediately understand that your partner has 4+♥ and 5+♠, even if you explained before what canapé is. Alerting isn’t just an obligation, it has a practical purpose, viz. make sure that your opponents are aware that a call might have a meaning that’s different from what they expect, which might be the case here. Besides, it is no trouble to pull the card from the box, is it? So try to avoid discussions about alertability, but alert if you think it’s the right thing to do.

Yeah..I am on the fence about this one.....We just explained we play canape 30 seconds prior (and many times also explained what canape means) and it is obvious Opener has Spades by virtue of her Pass. While I, as partner, do have specific knowledge that she has 5+ Spades , the Opponents surely should know she has 4+ Spades even if they don't fully understand what canape is...so the call does not (should not) have any meaning different from what they might expect...

However, to your point I am probably more inclined to alert against novice players and not alert against better players. I am sure the ACBL rules don't suggest I should base my alert decision based upon my perceived skill of my opponents, so that cannot be right though.

Any ACBL directors inclined to opine what their ruling might be, if called to the table in this situation?

[Cyberyeti]

 Shugart23, on 2018-August-05, 05:14, said:

Yeah..I am on the fence about this one.....We just explained we play canape 30 seconds prior (and many times also explained what canape means) and it is obvious Opener has Spades by virtue of her Pass. While I, as partner, do have specific knowledge that she has 5+ Spades , the Opponents surely should know she has 4+ Spades even if they don't fully understand what canape is...so the call does not (should not) have any meaning different from what they might expect...

However, to your point I am probably more inclined to alert against novice players and not alert against better players. I am sure the ACBL rules don't suggest I should base my alert decision based upon my perceived skill of my opponents, so that cannot be right though.

Any ACBL directors inclined to opine what their ruling might be, if called to the table in this situation?

Is it just possible partner has some 44(50) and fancies a penalty or do you open something else with that ?

[Shugart23]

 Cyberyeti, on 2018-August-05, 06:07, said:

Is it just possible partner has some 44(50) and fancies a penalty or do you open something else with that ?

We open 2C as a mini-Roman hand with 4450 or 4405 and Responder can bid 2D for the 'ask' (2H and 2S are to play)

[blackshoe]

The ACBL Alert Chart says you alert highly unusual passes. If partner is passing because you play canapé, I think that fits "highly unusual", so you should alert it. If you don't alert it, and the opponents are damaged, then I would adjust the score. I would issue a PP(Warning) for a first or second offense. After that, a PP in MPs, IMPs, or VPs as appropriate.

[pescetom]

So a PP can consist of a warning only? Something like a suspended sentence?

[Shugart23]

 blackshoe, on 2018-August-05, 09:14, said:

The ACBL Alert Chart says you alert highly unusual passes. If partner is passing because you play canapé, I think that fits "highly unusual", so you should alert it. If you don't alert it, and the opponents are damaged, then I would adjust the score. I would issue a PP(Warning) for a first or second offense. After that, a PP in MPs, IMPs, or VPs as appropriate.

I only mildly disagree and have no problem alerting BUT partner is not passing BECAUSE we play canape. The pass isn't particularly unusual and a far cry from being 'highly' unusual She is passing because she has Spades and my 'negative' double didn't help the partnership find a minor suit fit...…..The only difference between this sequence and Standard American or Precision is (everyone at the table should know) she has a 5th Spade, not just 4+.....


If we were playing against you in this auction, would you be surprised to find out she had that 5th Spade ?

[pran]

 pescetom, on 2018-August-05, 09:36, said:

So a PP can consist of a warning only? Something like a suspended sentence?

Quite true

[pescetom]

 Shugart23, on 2018-August-05, 05:14, said:

Yeah..I am on the fence about this one.....We just explained we play canape 30 seconds prior (and many times also explained what canape means) and it is obvious Opener has Spades by virtue of her Pass. While I, as partner, do have specific knowledge that she has 5+ Spades , the Opponents surely should know she has 4+ Spades even if they don't fully understand what canape is...so the call does not (should not) have any meaning different from what they might expect...

However, to your point I am probably more inclined to alert against novice players and not alert against better players. I am sure the ACBL rules don't suggest I should base my alert decision based upon my perceived skill of my opponents, so that cannot be right though.

I'm not an ACBL (or other) Director but FWIW I don't like the idea of basing your alert upon perceived skill of opponents. If a call is alertable it is alertable, and the opponent should not have to be skilful (let alone knowledgeable about your system and conventions) to understand an explanation correctly formulated.

[Shugart23]

 pescetom, on 2018-August-05, 14:07, said:

I'm not an ACBL (or other) Director but FWIW I don't like the idea of basing your alert upon perceived skill of opponents. If a call is alertable it is alertable, and the opponent should not have to be skilful (let alone knowledgeable about your system and conventions) to understand an explanation correctly formulated.

That was the point I was trying to make....a bid is alertable or it is not

[pran]

 Shugart23, on 2018-August-05, 14:47, said:

That was the point I was trying to make....a bid call is alertable or it is not

[sanst]

 Shugart23, on 2018-August-05, 14:47, said:

That was the point I was trying to make....a bid is alertable or it is not

As I wrote, it’s not about the call, it’s about making your opponents aware of the fact that the call might have a different or narrower meaning than they expect. It has to do with more than technicalities, it’s about behaviour, about your attitude towards the opponents. So, when in doubt, alert.

[Shugart23]

 sanst, on 2018-August-06, 02:29, said:

As I wrote, it’s not about the call, it’s about making your opponents aware of the fact that the call might have a different or narrower meaning than they expect. It has to do with more than technicalities, it’s about behaviour, about your attitude towards the opponents. So, when in doubt, alert.

sure...we bend over backwards with our alerts and frankly drive some of the Opponents crazy with the frequency with which we alert our calls. I am now strictly just asking what the rule (is in ACBL world) and so far one ACBL director has said I should alert the Pass as it has a highly unusual meaning.

1H-(1S)- X -P-P-?...…..if you are the 1S bidder, what do you expect the Opener to have ? 4 or more Spades, right ? Do you really think you have a claim for damage when you go down 3 doubled because she has 5 Spades ?

I guess the argument would be " Even though I was just told they play canape and I was expected her to have 4 or more Spades because Opener left the double in, I was not expecting her to have 5 or more Spades and thus I have been damaged"...... seems pretty weak to me.....


In my view, I don't think the bid is alertable by rule, but my partner isn't so sure , so we do alert it. I would like to hear another ACBL Director or two to say what they would do when called to the table to make a ruling.

[sanst]

 Shugart23, on 2018-August-06, 03:03, said:

In my view, I don't think the bid is alertable by rule, but my partner isn't so sure , so we do alert it. I would like to hear another ACBL Director or two to say what they would do when called to the table to make a ruling.

I’m not an ACBL director, but I think any half decent director would start, after having established the facts, asking how your opponents think they are damaged by the non-alert of the pass. At first sight I don’t see damage, just an unlucky result, but they might have an convincing story. A lot rides on you having made clear that your partner’s spades were longer than the hearts.