[gwnn]

Not posting this to the Laws forum because I just found it funny.

1♦-1♠
1NT*-p-p-p alerted, asked. "12-16, not always balanced."

next board, same opener:
1♦-1♥
1NT*-3NT

1NT alerted, asked, I get the answer "yup 12-16."

Dummy comes down with a 10 count, I look a bit surprised.

Dummy: "yea in our system, opener bids something else with 12-14; either 2♣ or 1♠. So I know he has 15-16"
Me: "??? isn't it 12-16?"
Dummy: "yea it is 12-16 but I know that he would bid something else with 12-14. After 1♦-1♠; 1NT, that's 12-16."
Me: "So the system says that this is 15-16?"
Dummy: "No, 1x-1M; 1NT is 12-16."
Me: "But this is an exception."
Dummy: "Yea exactly, I have the negative inference that 12-14 is impossible."
Me: "So the system says that this is 15-16?"
Dummy: "No no, the system says it is 12-16."

[KingCovert]

Funnily enough, if I were extremely poor at disclosure and played the system that I play, which is a variation on a Blue Team Club. This could quite possibly happen.

If opponents have agreed to open 17+ as 1♣, and only 12+ HCP hands or better, while playing a 12-14 NT. And, if they played Canape, then:

1♦ - 1♠ - 1NT: What this auction says is that Opener does not have a 1NT opener, nor a hand that is single-suited in diamonds, nor a two-suiter. Opener is balanced or 1444. But, balanced outside of their 1NT range.
1♦ - 1♥ - 1NT: This is different, because, opener can't have 4+♠, since that hand would bid 1♠. Still, no 1NT opener, no two-suiter. So.... they could be 3343, or (32)53 or 3352. Must be balanced, and outside of the 1NT range. Hence, always 15-16.

So, as I see it, it's true that Opener's hand is always 12-16, but, in the different sequences it's obviously much more constrained as you point out... I'd like to think that these players are just new to this system, and don't really understand it well, or their obligations within it... But I'm probably being rather optimistic.

That all being said, it's actually incorrect to alert 1NT. They should absolutely not be doing so. Regardless, when they explain, they should do it properly...

[FelicityR]

When I was playing Crowhurst many years ago...

https://www.ccfworld.../Crowhurst.html

...we always alerted a 1NT rebid (as per comment KingCovert), and so did the other partnership who I remember were also using it on a club evening.

However, it never came with a 'yes sir, no sir, three bags full, or it may not be full (depending on how we interpret it as a partnership explanation.)" It was always 12-16. With no difference whether responder bid 1♥ or 1♠.

I agree that if there are two different sequences that can either be 12-14 or 15-16 then the partnership need to alert 1NT, and not to generalise that it is 12-16 per se when by definition it is not.

One for the director to sort out

[gwnn]

Actually the two opps were super nice and obviously dummy wasn't trying to mislead me (or else he wouldn't have volunteered his "negative inferences"), he is just bad at full disclosure. I got a bit irritated during the exchange, but halfway through it all turned into amusement.

[KingCovert]

 gwnn, on 2020-January-22, 04:04, said:

Actually the two opps were super nice and obviously dummy wasn't trying to mislead me (or else he wouldn't have volunteered his "negative inferences"), he is just bad at full disclosure. I got a bit irritated during the exchange, but halfway through it all turned into amusement.

Oh, I wasn't trying to imply that they were malicious. Just, well, incapable.

But, as for NT rebids. I'm rather certain that they're not really alertable in this context, but, something like Canape is a pre-alert, and opponents need to ask questions where they lack understanding of the consequences, such as in these sequences. But, I do agree, I think they're just horrible at disclosure, and no amount of familiarity with their system would aid them in disclosing information.

[pescetom]

 KingCovert, on 2020-January-21, 17:29, said:

That all being said, it's actually incorrect to alert 1NT. They should absolutely not be doing so.

You must be living under some pretty weird regulations. A 1nt rebid that effectively shows 1nt point count is neither natural nor expected and the opponents should be informed.

[barmar]

What seems to be going on is that they have a general agreement that 1x-1y-1NT shows 12-16 HCP balanced. But there are specific cases of x and y where opener has other available rebids with a minimum opening. They don't consider the negative inferences from not making some other bid to be part of the meaning of 1NT, just as they also didn't explain "doesn't have 4-card support for y" (this should be is "obvious").

[pescetom]

 barmar, on 2020-January-23, 08:59, said:

What seems to be going on is that they have a general agreement that 1x-1y-1NT shows 12-16 HCP balanced. But there are specific cases of x and y where opener has other available rebids with a minimum opening. They don't consider the negative inferences from not making some other bid to be part of the meaning of 1NT, just as they also didn't explain "doesn't have 4-card support for y" (this should be is "obvious").

They knew full well it meant 15-16 here (otherwise they would not raise to game with 10 hcp) but disclosed 12-16 to the opponents. It's a clear violation of the laws, however dim this couple may or may not be.

[KingCovert]

 pescetom, on 2020-January-22, 16:57, said:

You must be living under some pretty weird regulations. A 1nt rebid that effectively shows 1nt point count is neither natural nor expected and the opponents should be informed.

I wasn't aware that ACOL players were required to alert 1NT rebids when playing a 12-14 NT? I'll make sure to advise them all of that.

Okay, I'm being rather sarcastic obviously, but, the point is valid. You don't alert a 1NT rebid when it shows a range outside of your 1NT opening range. That's sort of how 1NT rebids work, right? I'm fairly certain that they're playing Canape, and so the thing is here, they would never rebid 1NT unbalanced in the 2nd sequence, but might be 4441 in the first sequence. And so, they agreed that their 1NT rebid generally shows 12-16, but in certain sequences it doesn't.

You are correct (when you state in a later post) that they are incorrectly disclosing the relevant information here. But, they are absolutely not required to ALERT their 1NT rebid. And, it's almost insane that you think they are. They are, however, required to pre-alert that they play Canape.

[blackshoe]

What does and does not require an alert depends on the jurisdiction.

[pescetom]

 pescetom, on 2020-January-22, 16:57, said:

A 1nt rebid that effectively shows 1nt point count is neither natural nor expected and the opponents should be informed.

I was under the impression that they were playing strong 1NT, my apologies for any confusion caused by this. I still retain that the inferences of the 1D opening and 1NT rebid should be disclosed.

[pescetom]

 blackshoe, on 2020-January-23, 15:24, said:

What does and does not require an alert depends on the jurisdiction.

Absolutely.
In FIGB you would have to alert the 1D opening and perhaps the 1NT rebid.
In ACBL?

[helene_t]

 pescetom, on 2020-January-22, 16:57, said:

You must be living under some pretty weird regulations. A 1nt rebid that effectively shows 1nt point count is neither natural nor expected and the opponents should be informed.

Weirdness is in the eye of the beholder. In the Netherlands they used to alert all NT rebids and NT openings that have a different range from what they would have in "Dutch Acol", not sure if they still do so. They also used to alert Walsh-style NT rebids but I don't think they do so anymore.

In England and New Zealand we announce all 1NT openings regardless of strength. No notrump rebids are ever announced or alerted unless they are something very weird, like e.g. promising a 6-card suit or so.

I think the latter is reasonable. Opps need to know your NT opening range, but asking about it gives the UI that your action may depend on the range, so anouncing is practical. NT rebids are mostly of interest for the defense, and opps usually ask what the rebid shows. No need to alert anything. Besides, alerting would be based on the assumption that there's such a thing as an "expected" range for the NT rebid. There isn't. Some play 11-14, some 15-17, so have a narrower range, 17-19 or 18-20 is not common here but is certainly just as natural so it wouldn't occur to a visitor from Bulgaria or Poland to alert those unless given a loooooong list of all the natural bids they have to alert.

[barmar]

 pescetom, on 2020-January-23, 17:49, said:

Absolutely.
In FIGB you would have to alert the 1D opening and perhaps the 1NT rebid.
In ACBL?

In ACBL you'd announce "could be short" for the 1D opening if it can be shorter than 3 cards, and alert the 1NT rebid.

The logic is that we announce 1NT opening ranges, but when the opening isn't 1NT the opponents wouldn't be warned that it would have been weak, so they don't know that the rebid is strong.

In jurisdictions were weak NT is more common, the same logic doesn't really apply.

[pescetom]

 barmar, on 2020-January-24, 08:38, said:

In ACBL you'd announce "could be short" for the 1D opening if it can be shorter than 3 cards, and alert the 1NT rebid.

The logic is that we announce 1NT opening ranges, but when the opening isn't 1NT the opponents wouldn't be warned that it would have been weak, so they don't know that the rebid is strong.

Pretty much the same situation in FIGB about 1NT, and also about 1D if the only peculiarity is that it could be just 2 cards (or whatever).

[msjennifer]

 FelicityR, on 2020-January-21, 20:20, said:

When I was playing Crowhurst many years ago...

https://www.ccfworld.../Crowhurst.html

...we always alerted a 1NT rebid (as per comment KingCovert), and so did the other partnership who I remember were also using it on a club evening.

However, it never came with a 'yes sir, no sir, three bags full, or it may not be full (depending on how we interpret it as a partnership explanation.)" It was always 12-16. With no difference whether responder bid 1♥ or 1♠.

I agree that if there are two different sequences that can either be 12-14 or 15-16 then the partnership need to alert 1NT, and not to generalise that it is 12-16 per se when by definition it is not.

One for the director to sort out

Madam,I fully agree with you.