alerts and announcements
Alert Procedures
alertable bids

Alert Procedures

updated 6-Mayl-2007
  PDF is best for WEB viewing.  
  The rtf link loads the rtf file which you can view or print.  
This document link to the left defines the ACBL alert procedures (2005).
      At our club we have a few differences. One point that I would like to emphasise is that this is an international club and I will most certainly not automatically adopt a ruling that is valid in some countries and different in others. Some of the differences between out club and the ACBL suggestions are: -  
I strongly believe that a 2 'Stayman' response to a 1NT opener should be alerted if it does not promise a 4 card major. The ACBL says that it need not - I believe that they need to re-think this. I believe it is 'too late' to say that the 2 bidder may not have a 4-card major when he subsequently bids an invitational 2NT (playing 4-way transfers) or a 3 shape asking bid (SARS) or whatever.  
The ACBL says that a 1NT rebid promising 15-16 needs to be alerted. This is standard in Acol and I think that having previously informed the opponents that you play a weak NoTrump any further unsolicited information is unnecessary.  
Some doubles and even some passes need alerting. For example, if you play the multi-2 and the uninterrupted sequence goes 2 - 2 - pass. The ACBL document is not specific in this area. I think that all three bids have to be alerted. The pass needs to be alerted and the explanation that it is a weak heart hand given if asked.  
In response to a 1NT opener, the ACBL say that a 2 bid that is weak and natural need not be alerted (but atransfer should be announced). In my opinion these people (the ACBL) are simply moving backwards. Transfers are 'standard' these days and at our club I think that a natural weak response should be alerted or announced. I guess that all bids over partner's 1NT opening should be announced or alerted?  
  A more complete (and much more sensible) list of what needs alering or not at our club is given in 'Local Rules'.  
  Basically, we alert anything that is not 'standard'. That seems almost so obvious and logical to me that I am amazed that there are people who disagree. The people who represent the ACBL (or WBF) need to have a basic re-think. Alert the unexpected - simple if you think about it!