In acbl f2f games, the range of an opening NT is announced by the partner. Partner opens 1NT, I say 15-17. This is a very good rule. The person in second seat often needs to know the range before deciding whether to pass or, say, double. Without the announcement, it might go 1NT, "Range please?" "15 - 17 " Pass, suggesting a hand that would have acted if the range had been, say, 12-14. To avoid this improper conveying of information, second chair could always ask for the range, regardless of his strength. But if he is always going to ask, we might as well set things so that the partner of the opening NT bidder immediately gives the answer to the question that second chair should always ask.
The same applies to the 1
opening, "could be short" is announced if they regularly open a 4=4=3=2 shape with 1
. Occasionally, although not often I think, second chair will need to know about this before choosing a call. Most often it just saves time. Most play 1
as 3+ so it saves time if we do not have to ask them all what length is promised, we know they will announce if it could be short.
The alertability of the NFB highlights what I think is a useful distinction. Some alerts are for artificial bids, eg 1
- Pass - 4
. Partner is not suggesting that we play this in diamonds. Other times, as with the NFB, the suit is bid to show length in that suit, so it is a natural bid, but the strength is unexpected and the fact that is routinely passable is unexpected. So it is not really correct to say that the NFB is artificial. It is, we seem to all agree, not standard. There are people out there who think that it is not only natural but standard, so this is where some pretty direct help is needed by those who write alert charts. It's true that some artificial bids are alertable and some, such as Stayman 2
over 1NT, are not. But generally I think it is not difficult for a director to convince a player that an artificial bid needs alerting. For natural bids it's different. A player might easily say "I bid 2
because I have hearts and want to play 2
, why should that be alertable?". Well, it is, I am pretty sure that it is, but I can understand why a player might think that a director is simply indulging his own preferences. Sometimes players, and directors, appear to think that bidding differently than they do must surely be alertable even if the call is natural.
Anyway, I do believe I once tracked down an acbl source where the NFB was said to be alertable but so far I have not found it this time
Added, mostly for amusement: At the local club, one plair plays the Nunes system presumably without the extra features that got Fantuni-Nunes banned from the game. Rho opened 1
, Lho alerted, I asked, the explanation began "This shows one of five types of hands....". About halfway through I decided that if we were to play this hand before the round was called we needed to skip over a bit so I suggested that they just tell me their opening NT range and I would work out the rest as things went along. They did this and all was fine. Some alerts and subsequent explanations are not really all that clarifying.