[dickiegera]

---

We play Reverse BROMAD. Bergen raises of a major after a double.

We play that 2♣ shows 3 hearts and a limit raise, 2♦ shows 3 hearts and less than invitational [7+ to 10-]
and 2♥ would be 6 or less pts,[ maybe a bad 7]

Question: Is 2♥ alertable?

We know that 2♣ and 2♦ needs alerted

Thank you

[blackshoe]

That is unclear. In fact, it's unclear whether a major suit raise that could be on three cards is even natural. However, the meaning of 2♥ is affected by the meanings of 2♣ and 2♦, so I would alert it. Also, you can't get hurt (at least, not by the director) if you alert when you shouldn't.

I would expect that if you polled a large number of ACBL directors of all levels, you would not get anything approaching 100% consensus on the answer to the question. 50-50 seems much more likely.

[mcphee]

Yes it is an alert. Why should your side have information the other pair is not aware of?

Private agreements are alerts.

[Trinidad]

 mcphee, on 2013-November-10, 05:30, said:

Yes it is an alert. Why should your side have information the other pair is not aware of?

Private agreements are alerts.

That's not true. With my partner, I have the private agreement that a 1NT opening promises 15-17 and a balanced hand. No alert needed.

Whether something needs an alert or not is entirely governed by the alert regulations, in this case those of the ACBL.

Rik

[chrism]

While Blackshoe is correct that a literal reading of the definition of "natural" in the ACBL Alert Chart does not include 3-card raises of partner's 5-card major opening (!) I would expect a 100% consensus among both ACBL directors and rational beings - neither of which is a subset of the other- that it is in fact natural. Given that, this is alertable from line 1 of the Alert Chart:

Natural Calls Not Specifically Noted ... Unusual strength, shape, etc.

[ArtK78]

 chrism, on 2013-November-10, 07:06, said:

While Blackshoe is correct that a literal reading of the definition of "natural" in the ACBL Alert Chart does not include 3-card raises of partner's 5-card major opening (!) I would expect a 100% consensus among both ACBL directors and rational beings - neither of which is a subset of the other- that it is in fact natural. Given that, this is alertable from line 1 of the Alert Chart:

Natural Calls Not Specifically Noted ... Unusual strength, shape, etc.

This is not an unusual strength or shape, so I don't believe that the provision that you quote is the reason why the 2♥ bid would be alertable. It is a specific shape and strength that is more well defined than many players' direct major raise over a double, but it is neither unusual strength nor unusual shape.

Quite frankly, I don't know whether it is alertable or not. But I alert it. I play transfer advances over doubles with a number of partners, so 2♦ would be a good raise to 2♥ while 2♥ is a "trash" raise to 2♥. I alert 2♥, but I have yet to be shown a solid reason why it is alertable.

[chrism]

For many players a single raise in competition that could be on zero points and explicitly denies constructive values would be unexpected. That is why I regard it as "unusual" strength. There is certainly room for other opinions on that, but if asked for a ruling I will stick with alertable.

[ArtK78]

 chrism, on 2013-November-10, 09:25, said:

For many players a single raise in competition that could be on zero points and explicitly denies constructive values would be unexpected. That is why I regard it as "unusual" strength. There is certainly room for other opinions on that, but if asked for a ruling I will stick with alertable.

I don't know if anyone would bid 2♥ on a zero count. Having two ways to raise hearts allows you to differentiate between a "trash" raise to 2♥ - something like 4-7 HCP with three card support - and a good raise to 2♥ - 8-10 HCP and 3-4 card support.

[blackshoe]

 mcphee, on 2013-November-10, 05:30, said:

Yes it is an alert. Why should your side have information the other pair is not aware of?

Private agreements are alerts.

Only if the alert regulation or alert chart says they are.

[chrism]

 ArtK78, on 2013-November-10, 12:14, said:

I don't know if anyone would bid 2♥ on a zero count. Having two ways to raise hearts allows you to differentiate between a "trash" raise to 2♥ - something like 4-7 HCP with three card support - and a good raise to 2♥ - 8-10 HCP and 3-4 card support.

The OP said "6 or less pts,[ maybe a bad 7]" - I read that as 0-6+, and if he had meant "4-6+" he would presumably have said so.

[dickiegera]

 chrism, on 2013-November-10, 14:38, said:

The OP said "6 or less pts,[ maybe a bad 7]" - I read that as 0-6+, and if he had meant "4-6+" he would presumably have said so.

We would not raise with 0 pts, probably a good 3pts would be minimum with favorable vunerbility

[chrism]

 dickiegera, on 2013-November-10, 15:08, said:

We would not raise with 0 pts, probably a good 3pts would be minimum with favorable vunerbility

In that case, I agree with ArtK78 - not unusual enough to qualify as alertable.

[barmar]

 chrism, on 2013-November-10, 15:13, said:

In that case, I agree with ArtK78 - not unusual enough to qualify as alertable.

While many players will raise with less than 6 HCP in an auction like this, the fact that it's specifically limited to 6 HCP because they have other ways to show better single raises makes it unusual enough for me.

I think it's similar to making a direct bid of a suit when partner made a takeout double in a context where Lebensohl is available. The fact that you didn't go through Lebensohl changes the range of possible strengths, and it should be alerted.