[blml] Protecting yourself after failure to alert

[Jerry Fusselman]

On 2/12/07, Ed Reppert <ereppert at rochester.rr.com> wrote:
> > Hm. A weak 2 bid in clubs is itself alertable. Either way, I would
> argue that once a pair agrees to play it as weak, the same rules
> regarding responses apply as when the opening bid is at the 2 level
> in some other suit, with the meaning "weak 2 bid". Granted, the alert
> regulation doesn't say so explicitly, but then I've long been of the
> opinion that the alert regulations were written by someone with no
> experience whatsoever in writing rules for a game.
>

Of course a weak 2C opening is alertable.  I am almost sure it is prealertable.

Ed, your next sentence is maybe not as obvious as you think.  For
example, consider
http://www.marvinfrench.com/p1/laws&regs/alerts.pdf, which gives the
best (for clarity and completeness) description I have seen for what
is alertable in the ACBL.

Near the top of this document, the following is listed as alertable:
"2C opening that is natural but not strong, and conventional
responses."  According to the quote, Ogust over a weak 2C is
alertable.

Unfortunately, it seems he later contracts this by saying this under
*not* alertable: "Non-invitational raise of a natural non-strong two
bid, or a forcing 2NT response even if conventional."

Marv, if your reading this, can you elaborate?  I.e., would you say
that Ogust over a weak 2C is alertable or not?

-Jerry Fusselman