[blml] Announce or alert?

[Alain Gottcheiner]

David Grabiner a écrit :
> "Grattan Endicott" <gesta at tiscali.co.uk> writes:
>
>   
> The theoretical advantage of announcements is that they avoid routine alerts, and thus save time 
> and avoid UI when the opponents must regularly ask, and allow the alert to call 
> attention to the unusual call.  In particular, if you play forcing Stayman, 
> 1NT-2D is alerted, not announced, and the opponents are more likely to check the 
> CC or ask, because a Jacoby transfer would be announced.
>   
AG : this is theoretical indeed. We had to remember what was alertable 
in several contexts (like different countries, screens or not, short or 
long matches, possibly club regulations) and now, to make good use of 
the announcement regulations, we'll have to remember what was 
"announçable" (?). Leave well enough alone. I'll stick with my idea that 
one should ask whenever needed and the UI from showing interest is often 
negligible.

One possible way to minimize UI would be to allow "random questions" 
like there is random timing behind screens, but I'm afraid it would also 
help crooks.

> this may create a UI problem.  (1H)-P-(P)-1NT is sometimes announced as "11-14" 
> (there is a space for this sequence on the ACBL CC but many players haven't 
> agreed on it).  If the announcement replaces an alert, there is not normally a 
> UI problem; 1NT-(2C)-2H when bid with hearts causes the same UI whether 2H is 
> alerted or announced as "Transfer".
>
>
>   
AG : not quite. When alerted, it might mean many things, including 
natural (what about natural F1, with 2D as generic signoff ? what about 
the guy who alerted, because he was told he'd alert nonforcing new suits 
? what about "often 4 cards" ?) , and perhaps they don't want to know, 
won't ask, and no MI will ensue.


Best regards

    Alain