[blml] alertability

[Alain Gottcheiner]

Dear blmlists,

Two questions about alerts and explanations arose among our group. We'd 
very much appreciate your comments on them.

1. The bidding :
N     E     S   W 	
1C   1H   X    p
1S   2D

Now South asks West whether they have 2-suited conventions.
Assume they indeed play that 2NT shows 55+ in hearts and diamonds ; 
apparently that's what South would like to know ; but they play it "strong 
or weak".

Should West :
a) answer affirmatively, and volunteer the information that 2NT would have 
been strong/weak, so that partner probably has an intermediate-strength 55.
b) answer affirmatively, and that's all, because if South wants to know 
whether a 55 is still possible, he should ask.
c) answer affimatively, and that's all, because 2D seems to show 55 anyway 
(bridge logic ; with 54, double) and because an experienced player should 
know there are hands unsuitable for a 2NT bid anyway (poor O/DR).

2. You have an agreement that weak suits may be bypassed ; for example, you 
might answer 1NT to 1C within the usual range, while holding a weak 4-card 
major.
This should be disclosed, and the letter of most regulations say you've to 
alert everytime such a bypass would be unexpected ; this means nearly any 
low-level bid is alertable, and makes it unpractical.
So, is it enough to put such an agreement into the 'important notes' 
section, or pre-alert it ?

Thank you for your advice.

    Alain