Re: Can a legal non-alert be misinformation anyway?

considering that a 4Sp response to 4Di van only mean that he 
misunderstood, I believe I should be allowed to bid 5Di.

Peter Smulders wrote:
> The Dutch rule - since 2009 - is that bids above the 3-level are only
> alertable in the first round of bidding, counting from the opening bid.
> Question: if Herman's opening bid had been misexplained would he
> still be allowed to bid 5D?
> 
> At 07:18 AM 2018-11-08, Herman De Wael wrote:
> 
> 
>> Steve Willner wrote:
>> [ ... ]
>>> FWIW, if the alerting rules were "nothing above 3NT," I'd always ask
>>> about a 4C or higher bid on the first round of the auction no matter
>>> what hand I held.
>>
>> That seems to be a good advice, but it kind of defeats the purpose of
>> the non-alert: not giving UI to partner. Of course the reason for the
>> non-alert does not work for opening bids - and indeed the Dutch rule
>> used to be to alert anyhow on opening bids. The Belgian regulation is
>> simpler and therefore we can accept this small disadvantage.
>>
>> But anyway - you would always ask in second seat. But suppose your
>> partner does not ask (maybe he has looked at the SC) and when it's your
>> turn, the 4SP bid has come. Would you still ask? or assume 4Di was a
>> transfer to spades? and if you do the latter, would you not feel
>> misinformed - would you accept the statement by TD "yous should have
>> asked". I'm not sure that I would.
>>
>> Herman.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Blml mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
> 

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com

_______________________________________________
Blml mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml