Help Suit Game Try that isn't
#21
Posted 2010-May-30, 21:01
Unless you have some special agreement about this sequence that's likely to be unfamiliar to most bridge players, I don't see the need to alert.
The response that you should alert if your regulations say so is not helpful, since ACBL's alert regulations don't specifically cover this (are other jurisdictions better?). There are some general principles (e.g. alert highly unusual and unexpected meanings) but they're open to judgement.
#22
Posted 2010-May-30, 21:24
jillybean, on May 30 2010, 12:41 PM, said:
My reading of this is not that 3♦ shows length in diamonds and it was initially a game try, but once opener carried on to game it became a slam try.
Note the words (emphasis mine) cue bid. This implies that the meaning of 3♦ after the 4♥ call is actually substantially different -- initially it showed "length in diamonds and a game try" but now it showed "control of diamonds and a slam try." Note that a help-suit try always involves 3+ cards in the suit, and could be quite a weak suit like Qxxx or even perhaps xxx. A cue bid is a very different thing, and could easily be based on shortage (like AK-tight or even a small singleton) but never a suit like Qxxx or xxx.
I agree that the change from "help suit game try" to "help suit slam try" should not require an alert -- 3♦ is basically natural in either case. But the change from "help suit game try" to "first or second round control in this suit" (which is how I'm reading the original post) is quite different. This is an implication that the 3♦ call did not in fact show length in diamonds, and certainly requires an alert.
a.k.a. Appeal Without Merit
#23
Posted 2010-May-30, 22:13
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
#24
Posted 2010-May-30, 23:41
awm, on May 30 2010, 10:24 PM, said:
jillybean, on May 30 2010, 12:41 PM, said:
My reading of this is not that 3♦ shows length in diamonds and it was initially a game try, but once opener carried on to game it became a slam try.
Note the words (emphasis mine) cue bid. This implies that the meaning of 3♦ after the 4♥ call is actually substantially different -- initially it showed "length in diamonds and a game try" but now it showed "control of diamonds and a slam try." Note that a help-suit try always involves 3+ cards in the suit, and could be quite a weak suit like Qxxx or even perhaps xxx. A cue bid is a very different thing, and could easily be based on shortage (like AK-tight or even a small singleton) but never a suit like Qxxx or xxx.
I agree that the change from "help suit game try" to "help suit slam try" should not require an alert -- 3♦ is basically natural in either case. But the change from "help suit game try" to "first or second round control in this suit" (which is how I'm reading the original post) is quite different. This is an implication that the 3♦ call did not in fact show length in diamonds, and certainly requires an alert.
Agree, but *IF* something is alertable, it would be the 4H call; it is at that point that the nature of the 3D call is clarified as cue bid and slam try instead of HSGT or even a Natural game try. The OP says they had the agreement the 4H now showed a diamond cue bid (not length, not HSGT). I am sure blackshoe will post here what ACBL response will be - if he gets an answer.
#25
Posted 2010-May-31, 00:28
But anyway, Kathryn, nobody really plays this - if you want to try for slam over 2♥, you either bid a long side suit (ostensibly a game try, but can also be a slam try) or you splinter.
#26
Posted 2010-May-31, 01:37
#27
Posted 2010-May-31, 05:33
kevperk, on May 31 2010, 08:37 AM, said:
Why do you think a 3♦ control bid is not alertable here? I can't find anything on the alert chart to support that view.
Quote
It sounds to me like in your system 3♦ either has length or is the first move in a slam investigation in which case it need not have length. I don't see how a call which may by agreement be made without length can be said to "show length".
#28
Posted 2010-May-31, 05:55
If you heard this complete auction, would you think that 3♦ was a slam try with control in diamonds?
If not, what is the second option?
-P.J. Painter.
#29
Posted 2010-May-31, 07:29
#30
Posted 2010-May-31, 09:16
I confess that we don't alert 4♥ and maybe we should but the hand typically is based on a shape slam try instead of power but wide ranging. Might be based on the Latte with the extra shot kicking in.
I'm torn with the fact that my explanation of a 4♥ alert could mis-describe my pards actual hand way too often.
What is baby oil made of?
#31
Posted 2010-May-31, 09:42
campboy, on May 31 2010, 07:33 AM, said:
There's nothing on the alert chart to support the opposite view, either.
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
#32
Posted 2010-May-31, 11:00
If that auction occurred in my old club, it would be "partner wanted to bid game, but can't. Therefore we should make it; I'd better bid it." The one time it happened when I was the TD rather than the player, +170 and a austere explanation was the immediate result (with comments on how unfortunate it was that I couldn't give -100 with responder's hand).
#33
Posted 2010-May-31, 11:10
blackshoe, on May 31 2010, 04:42 PM, said:
campboy, on May 31 2010, 07:33 AM, said:
There's nothing on the alert chart to support the opposite view, either.
The chart says that you should alert "all other conventional and/or artificial bids", ie all those not mentioned on the chart. "Artificial" is not defined, but normally used to mean "not natural" ("conventional" is defined, but a control bid does not seem to meet that definition). The definition of natural mentions the expected length as "3+ in a minor and 4+ in a major for opening bids, rebids and responses." The call being discussed is opener's rebid. If it merely shows a control it does not show the 3+ cards expected of a natural rebid. Thus it is not natural and is artificial; there is nothing I can see to say this is an exception to "alert artificial bids".
#34
Posted 2010-May-31, 12:28
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
#35
Posted 2010-May-31, 14:58
campboy, on May 31 2010, 06:10 PM, said:
Artificial call is defined in the Laws of Duplicate Bridge 2007
Quote
London UK
#36
Posted 2010-May-31, 15:11
kenrexford, on May 31 2010, 12:55 PM, said:
If you heard this complete auction, would you think that 3♦ was a slam try with control in diamonds?
No.
Quote
A hand with a diamond side-suit/values that was looking for a suitable holding opposite for slam. If you had something like Q10xx in diamonds and a good hand outside, wouldn't you like to focus partner's attention on their diamond holding?
#37
Posted 2010-May-31, 17:26
blackshoe, on May 30 2010, 11:13 PM, said:
But 4H is a completely natural bid. If I have an explicit understanding that 3D may not always be a normal game try and may even be shortage in diamonds then I have an obligation to let opponents in on this agreement, do I not? They cannot double a possibly artificial 3D call if I wait until 4H to alert.
#38
Posted 2010-May-31, 17:35
The strange idea running through this thread is that the meaning of 3♦ changes. It does not. At the time it was made, it was not a help suit game try, which is not alertable. It is a help suit game try or a cue bid so alert it The fact that one meaning is more likely than the other does not affect this.
As for alerting 4♥, apart from being unnecessary, when did you start alerting over 3NT?
Incidentally, Frances' meaning for 3♦ in the sequence not only seems the obvious one, but the only possible explanation with a competent pair once they do not alert 3♦.
Merseyside England UK
EBL TD
Currently at home
Visiting IBLF from time to time
<webjak666@gmail.com>
#39
Posted 2010-May-31, 18:14
bluejak, on May 31 2010, 07:35 PM, said:
If it was clear, I wouldn't have come to the conclusion that it is not alertable.
I await a response from Memphis.
Winstonm said:
It conveys a message about the previous 3♦ bid, to wit, that 3♦ was not actually a game try.
IIRC, there is a precedent in that in the uncontested auction 1NT-2♦-2♥-2♠, where the 2♠ bid cancels the transfer and assigns some other meaning (some kind of minor suit holding, I think, but as I don't play it, I'm not sure) to 2♦, we are told to announce 2♦ as if it were definitely a transfer, and then alert the 2♠ bid which cancels that meaning. I don't see the situation we've been discussing as any different.
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
#40
Posted 2010-May-31, 18:27
bluejak, on May 31 2010, 11:35 PM, said:
I disagree.
I can think of four other possible explanations why a competent player might bid 3D and then 4H over 3H:
1) Opener was always going to game, but wanted to give responder a chance to bid 3NT if he was loaded in clubs and spades.
2) Opener was always going to game, but wanted to discourage a diamond opening lead.
3) Opener was always going to game, but he thought that his LHO might suspect 2) if he bid this way and he actually wanted to encourage a diamond lead.
4) Opener was always going to game, did not particularly care about the opening lead, but wanted to mislead the defenders about the distribution of his hand.
(I am not suggesting that anywhere near all competent players get involved in 2, 3, and 4, but 2 at least is very common in the real world - I suppose this means that 3 "should be" as well even though it probably isn't).
Note that "psychs" like 2, 3, and 4 are completely safe. 3D does not give responder rights to bid above 4H. For example, when the auction continues 3H-4H, responder must Pass 100% of the time.
That is why I don't buy the concept that 4H "converts a game try into a cuebid". 4H does nothing of the sort - it just says "I want to try to win 10 tricks with hearts as trump and I bid 3D because I thought it was smart at the time. Maybe I was always going to play in 4H and maybe I would have considered other contracts had you bid something other than 3H."
From that it follows (for me at least) that the notion of alerting 4H does not make any sense. 4H is as natural as a bid can possibly be - it is a pure and complete signoff, just like it sounds. 4H conveys no other meaning so there is nothing to alert.
Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com