Help
If my partner and me invent a couple accord or a new system and alert it. Why we have to see if it is accept from national or world federation.
Isn' it a limit to fantasy and to evolution of game this attitude.
Gigi
why the rules
#2
- Group: Admin
- Posts: 14,566
- Joined: 2003-February-13
- Gender:Male
- Location:Amelia Island, FL
- Interests:Bridge, what else?
Posted 2003-December-01, 08:06
Bridge has high standards of ethics and etiquette which are observed by the players. One of these standards is that no partnership can have secret agreements, and that each side should be able to draw the same (appropriate) inferences from the bidding (although seeing your own cards may help you fine tune the inference that would not be available to the other players not looking at your cards). Ok, so when you create your own convention, surely you will alert it. So the first part of this requirement is safely passed. Your agreement will not be secret. But the problem exist in the second part. When you make a bid with a home-cooked convention, what affect does that have on drawing inferences? What other home-cooked convention existed that you could have used, but didnt which might fine tune your partnership inferences that would not be available to your unsuspecting opponents? If you invent an entire new system, the ability to draw the proper inferences will be completely thrown out the window without time to study in some detail your system. I hope you can see the ethical/etiquette problem here.
The second problem is forming an adequate defensive plan by your opponents. Lets assume your opponents create a convention where an opening bid of 2D is either Long weak diamonds, or 4-4-1-4 with short diamonds, or an Acol two bid in clubs., or a balanced 22-24 hcp. Ok, not a perfect convention, but your LHO opens 2D and your partner doubles. What does this show? Does it show diamonds? Is it a takeout of diamonds? What if RHO bids 2H, and you double. Is that responsive, is that penalty, is that card showing? Having never seen the homegrown convention, obviously your opponents have not had time to discuss a defense against it. Even if they get their first bid right, will they understand what the continuations mean in competitive auctions. What shows good hand, what shows better hands, etc.
When you play in a sanctioned tournament, there is either a list of approved conventions for that event, or the players are required to submit their convention cards with full documentation (and recommended defenses for odd conventions) in advance. In the first case, it is your responsibility to prepare your defenses for the allowed conventions. In the second case, you are pre-alerted and prepared for the special surprises your opponents throw at you since you have their convention card in advanced. If their conventions are highly unusual, then you will be allowed to refer to the defensive measures to their convention during the auction.
It is this spirit of the game, that both sides be able to draw the same inference, and be on equal footing with regard to the subsequent bidding that makes it necessary for you to submit your conventions. Having said that, there are some things you can home cook. For instance, on the ACBL General chart you ARE ALLOWED to create any conventional initial RESPONSE that shows GAME FORCING VALUES or better as long as it is not part of a relay system. And you can create basically any convention you like after a natural 1NT opening or overcall as long as the 1NT bid showed as long as 1NT contained a range of 5 hcp or less, and had at least 10 hcp. In the ACBL there are other examples as well. I once played that 1NT-P-2D was any game try hand without a four card major (can have 5 or 6 card major however). Partners responses were up the line game reject/Accept. So that 1N-2D-2H opener would reject game try in hearts, but does not say anything about other game tries. 1N-2D-2S would reject game try in spades but would accept try in hearts. Responder could then issue strong game try, for instance by raising spades in the last example. To this I added 2NT through 3H as transfers, if transferring to major, it was game force, and I used a key card/fit showing response schedule. Game forcing minor suit hands with a four card major start with transfer to minor, then bid the four card major. Opener signed off or showed key cards and fit to this as well. All this was perfectly legal within a General chart event or higher (acbl events are limited, general, Mid, or Super Chart. The WBF and other bridge organization have similar rules I think.
The second problem is forming an adequate defensive plan by your opponents. Lets assume your opponents create a convention where an opening bid of 2D is either Long weak diamonds, or 4-4-1-4 with short diamonds, or an Acol two bid in clubs., or a balanced 22-24 hcp. Ok, not a perfect convention, but your LHO opens 2D and your partner doubles. What does this show? Does it show diamonds? Is it a takeout of diamonds? What if RHO bids 2H, and you double. Is that responsive, is that penalty, is that card showing? Having never seen the homegrown convention, obviously your opponents have not had time to discuss a defense against it. Even if they get their first bid right, will they understand what the continuations mean in competitive auctions. What shows good hand, what shows better hands, etc.
When you play in a sanctioned tournament, there is either a list of approved conventions for that event, or the players are required to submit their convention cards with full documentation (and recommended defenses for odd conventions) in advance. In the first case, it is your responsibility to prepare your defenses for the allowed conventions. In the second case, you are pre-alerted and prepared for the special surprises your opponents throw at you since you have their convention card in advanced. If their conventions are highly unusual, then you will be allowed to refer to the defensive measures to their convention during the auction.
It is this spirit of the game, that both sides be able to draw the same inference, and be on equal footing with regard to the subsequent bidding that makes it necessary for you to submit your conventions. Having said that, there are some things you can home cook. For instance, on the ACBL General chart you ARE ALLOWED to create any conventional initial RESPONSE that shows GAME FORCING VALUES or better as long as it is not part of a relay system. And you can create basically any convention you like after a natural 1NT opening or overcall as long as the 1NT bid showed as long as 1NT contained a range of 5 hcp or less, and had at least 10 hcp. In the ACBL there are other examples as well. I once played that 1NT-P-2D was any game try hand without a four card major (can have 5 or 6 card major however). Partners responses were up the line game reject/Accept. So that 1N-2D-2H opener would reject game try in hearts, but does not say anything about other game tries. 1N-2D-2S would reject game try in spades but would accept try in hearts. Responder could then issue strong game try, for instance by raising spades in the last example. To this I added 2NT through 3H as transfers, if transferring to major, it was game force, and I used a key card/fit showing response schedule. Game forcing minor suit hands with a four card major start with transfer to minor, then bid the four card major. Opener signed off or showed key cards and fit to this as well. All this was perfectly legal within a General chart event or higher (acbl events are limited, general, Mid, or Super Chart. The WBF and other bridge organization have similar rules I think.
--Ben--
#3
- mmm Duvel
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 10,728
- Joined: 2003-July-30
- Gender:Male
- Location:Belgium
- Interests:Duvel, Whisky
Posted 2003-December-01, 08:11
I'm not fond of all these rules either, but they are necessary in some cases.
Just suppose you play against a beginner pair and you may use whatever system you want. These beginners will never be able to play bridge the way they want to. There are a lot of people who play bridge just as a social game, to have some contact with other human beings and play for fun. We on the other hand play to win
and if we use all our intelligence to create a system which works optimal for that purpose and use it against these social players, they won't like it at all. It's just a matter of protecting the weak players from experts.
Note that the higher competition you play, the fewer rules applie. But still some rules are unnecessary imo. If you ask me, just play without any rules for bidding systems at the highest level, and everyone who plays there will become even better! Where I live even the highest competion has rules...
But there's always evolution in the rules. Before strong pass systems there was no rule which forbid that. I guess the first time someone came up with a strong club system it wasn't allowed immediatly, but now it's a standard system. I still think you can make very good systems which are allowed by the WBF and which are very good (Paul Marston's Moscito for example). I'm just glad that artificial systems aren't forbidden, because otherwise all sorts of fantasy would be excluded from the game.
Free
Just suppose you play against a beginner pair and you may use whatever system you want. These beginners will never be able to play bridge the way they want to. There are a lot of people who play bridge just as a social game, to have some contact with other human beings and play for fun. We on the other hand play to win
and if we use all our intelligence to create a system which works optimal for that purpose and use it against these social players, they won't like it at all. It's just a matter of protecting the weak players from experts.Note that the higher competition you play, the fewer rules applie. But still some rules are unnecessary imo. If you ask me, just play without any rules for bidding systems at the highest level, and everyone who plays there will become even better! Where I live even the highest competion has rules...
But there's always evolution in the rules. Before strong pass systems there was no rule which forbid that. I guess the first time someone came up with a strong club system it wasn't allowed immediatly, but now it's a standard system. I still think you can make very good systems which are allowed by the WBF and which are very good (Paul Marston's Moscito for example). I'm just glad that artificial systems aren't forbidden, because otherwise all sorts of fantasy would be excluded from the game.
Free
"It may be rude to leave to go to the bathroom, but it's downright stupid to sit there and piss yourself" - blackshoe
#4
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 15,495
- Joined: 2003-February-13
- Gender:Male
- Location:Natick, MA
-
Interests:Travel
Cooking
Brewing
Hiking
Posted 2003-December-01, 08:26
Funny that you bring up MOSCITO.
Marston considers strong club systems grossly inferior to forcing pass.
The only reason that he switched to strong club was odious systems regulations.
As another "amusing" aside, the ACBL doesn't permit MOSCITO in anything but Superchart events.
Seems that 1D = 4+ Hearts is too complicated to defend against.
Marston considers strong club systems grossly inferior to forcing pass.
The only reason that he switched to strong club was odious systems regulations.
As another "amusing" aside, the ACBL doesn't permit MOSCITO in anything but Superchart events.
Seems that 1D = 4+ Hearts is too complicated to defend against.
Alderaan delenda est
#5
- Group: Admin
- Posts: 14,566
- Joined: 2003-February-13
- Gender:Male
- Location:Amelia Island, FL
- Interests:Bridge, what else?
Posted 2003-December-01, 09:03
Quote
As another "amusing" aside, the ACBL doesn't permit MOSCITO in anything but Superchart events.
Seems that 1D = 4+ Hearts is too complicated to defend against.
Seems that 1D = 4+ Hearts is too complicated to defend against.
First, not all versions of moscito use 1D to show 4H's. Second, I would think that moscito would be allowed under Mid-Chart, unless your relays are not game force (1D showing 4H's is not really a relay perse, as it describes your hand).
Before Mid-chart, your system runs afoul of several regulations, you open one of suit with less than 10 hcp and you use a "relay system". But the mid-level chart allows 8 hcp one of a suit, and "relay systems" which by definition includes much of what you do with moscito.
I have seen nothing in the rules that disallow 1D opening bid showing an opening hand and 4+ hearts. The defeinition of "Relay" is one where one player tells nothing about his own hand while interrogating partner about his hand. The one diamond bid told a very lot about opener's hand.
I suspect if you run afoul of mid-chart rules, you are using relays that are not game force, and perhaps some of your opening two bids, and it really has nothing to do with the 1D opening bid. If someone is banning your 1D bid per se, at a mid-level event, I would like to see what he is basing this ban upon.
Ben
--Ben--
#6
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 15,495
- Joined: 2003-February-13
- Gender:Male
- Location:Natick, MA
-
Interests:Travel
Cooking
Brewing
Hiking
Posted 2003-December-01, 09:22
Hi Ben
I just got done with an EXTENSIVE run arround with the conventions committee over MOSCITO's transfer openings. The ACBL Midchart clearly permits any bid that promises 4+ cards in a known suit. However, Midchart methods also require approved defenses. Sadly, Jeff Mechstroth and Chip Martel refuse to sanction any defenses to a 1D opening promising 4+ Hearts or 1H promising 4+ Spades. [Both believe that these openings are far too complicated to defend against]
Its certainly true that their are MOSCITO variants that don't use transfer openings, however, the standard/official version is based on transfers. I think that the transfer opening structure is critical to the system logic.
1. The transfer opening structure is designed to right-side contracts. We prefer that the relay asker declare contracts rather than the relay responder.
(a) Defenders know very little information about the relay askers hand, which significantly
complicates their job.
(
The relay asker is typically stronger than the relay responder, increasing the chance that
the defense will lead into a tenace.
2. Transfer openings complement MOSCITOs Majors First opening style by preserving bidding space for relatively frequent hand types. Playing MOSCITO, opener will initially show Hearts on many more hands than he shows Diamonds. Transfer openings align the level of the opening bid with its frequency.
Switching to a more "natural" opening structure in which 1D promises Diamonds, 1H promises Hearts, and 1S promises Spades would require completely reworking the relay scheme. For example, hands with 4 Hearts and longer Spades would need to be opened 1H which really doesn't appeal to me.
I just got done with an EXTENSIVE run arround with the conventions committee over MOSCITO's transfer openings. The ACBL Midchart clearly permits any bid that promises 4+ cards in a known suit. However, Midchart methods also require approved defenses. Sadly, Jeff Mechstroth and Chip Martel refuse to sanction any defenses to a 1D opening promising 4+ Hearts or 1H promising 4+ Spades. [Both believe that these openings are far too complicated to defend against]
Its certainly true that their are MOSCITO variants that don't use transfer openings, however, the standard/official version is based on transfers. I think that the transfer opening structure is critical to the system logic.
1. The transfer opening structure is designed to right-side contracts. We prefer that the relay asker declare contracts rather than the relay responder.
(a) Defenders know very little information about the relay askers hand, which significantly
complicates their job.
(
The relay asker is typically stronger than the relay responder, increasing the chance that the defense will lead into a tenace.
2. Transfer openings complement MOSCITOs Majors First opening style by preserving bidding space for relatively frequent hand types. Playing MOSCITO, opener will initially show Hearts on many more hands than he shows Diamonds. Transfer openings align the level of the opening bid with its frequency.
Switching to a more "natural" opening structure in which 1D promises Diamonds, 1H promises Hearts, and 1S promises Spades would require completely reworking the relay scheme. For example, hands with 4 Hearts and longer Spades would need to be opened 1H which really doesn't appeal to me.
Alderaan delenda est
#7
- Group: Admin
- Posts: 14,566
- Joined: 2003-February-13
- Gender:Male
- Location:Amelia Island, FL
- Interests:Bridge, what else?
Posted 2003-December-01, 10:14
It seems to me that you could easily come up with an approved defense to 1D and 1H. I mean these are not horrific bids. I would jot down the following.... and hand it in to the tournment committee for approval.
1D--?
DBL = shows hearts
1H = equal to takeout double of 1H
all others = as if 1H was opened
1H --?
DBL = shows spades
1S = equal to takeout double of 1S
all others, as if 1S was opened.
I prefer this structure, but other might like dbl of the suit "opened" to show the bid suit, or perhaps a takeout of the shown suit. But this doesn't seem to be a huge issue. I would just write down one "preferred" and one "optional" treatment, and turn that in. That should handle it, this is a simple enough situation...and you give the defense even more opportunties.
1D--?
DBL = shows hearts
1H = equal to takeout double of 1H
all others = as if 1H was opened
1H --?
DBL = shows spades
1S = equal to takeout double of 1S
all others, as if 1S was opened.
I prefer this structure, but other might like dbl of the suit "opened" to show the bid suit, or perhaps a takeout of the shown suit. But this doesn't seem to be a huge issue. I would just write down one "preferred" and one "optional" treatment, and turn that in. That should handle it, this is a simple enough situation...and you give the defense even more opportunties.
--Ben--
#8
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 15,495
- Joined: 2003-February-13
- Gender:Male
- Location:Natick, MA
-
Interests:Travel
Cooking
Brewing
Hiking
Posted 2003-December-01, 10:36
Hi Ben
I think that you are missing the point:
Martel and Meckstroth don't want to allow this method to be played. They are refusing to approve ANY defense.
Tim Goodwin and I spent a MONTH sending emails back and forth with the Committee trying to find an appropriate defense. Every defense we submitted was rejected as either "incomplete" or "too complex".
I'd welcome any ideas that you might have regarding how we could get a defense approved.
I think that you are missing the point:
Martel and Meckstroth don't want to allow this method to be played. They are refusing to approve ANY defense.
Tim Goodwin and I spent a MONTH sending emails back and forth with the Committee trying to find an appropriate defense. Every defense we submitted was rejected as either "incomplete" or "too complex".
I'd welcome any ideas that you might have regarding how we could get a defense approved.
Alderaan delenda est
#9
- Group: Admin
- Posts: 14,566
- Joined: 2003-February-13
- Gender:Male
- Location:Amelia Island, FL
- Interests:Bridge, what else?
Posted 2003-December-01, 10:57
There is an ACBL approved defense to
1C-P-1D where 1D shows 4+ hearts
There is an ACBL approved defense to
1C-P-1H where 1H shows 4+ spades
This defense is DBL shows a one level overcall in the bid suit... and a "cue-bid" in the transfer suit is takeout, and all other bids are natural. I can't imagine a similar defense without the CLUB opening bid could not be approved. Perhaps you are construct too complex of a scheme... .but come on, this seems trivial in the extremes. Maybe we could take a poll here concerning defense strategies and get a public relation thing going. I have no desire to play 1D shows 4+hearts, and 1H shows 4+ spades, but I see no reason to stop you from playing it if you desire in a mid level event or higher... (I like it when my opponents play inferior methods why the heck should we ban your poor choices....hehehehe) :-)
This of course means that you must also not play any "invitational relays" in response to 1D or 1H. Also responder relays must be game force, or I don't support the fight to get it approved for mid-chart.
Ben
1C-P-1D where 1D shows 4+ hearts
There is an ACBL approved defense to
1C-P-1H where 1H shows 4+ spades
This defense is DBL shows a one level overcall in the bid suit... and a "cue-bid" in the transfer suit is takeout, and all other bids are natural. I can't imagine a similar defense without the CLUB opening bid could not be approved. Perhaps you are construct too complex of a scheme... .but come on, this seems trivial in the extremes. Maybe we could take a poll here concerning defense strategies and get a public relation thing going. I have no desire to play 1D shows 4+hearts, and 1H shows 4+ spades, but I see no reason to stop you from playing it if you desire in a mid level event or higher... (I like it when my opponents play inferior methods why the heck should we ban your poor choices....hehehehe) :-)
This of course means that you must also not play any "invitational relays" in response to 1D or 1H. Also responder relays must be game force, or I don't support the fight to get it approved for mid-chart.
Ben
--Ben--
#10
- mmm Duvel
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 10,728
- Joined: 2003-July-30
- Gender:Male
- Location:Belgium
- Interests:Duvel, Whisky
Posted 2003-December-01, 11:04
Consider as a 1H opening, and use 1H as Dbl (if partner would leave 1H*, now he will play 1H) and use Dbl to show the opening suit:
Pass = nothing
Dbl = lead directing or suit
1H = considered as take out dbl
1S = normal overcall
1NT = normal NT overcall, control in H
2C = normal overcall
2D = normal overcall
2H = Michaels cuebid
...
I dont get the problem with "too complicated" or "not complete" if you use this defense...
Pass = nothing
Dbl = lead directing or suit
1H = considered as take out dbl
1S = normal overcall
1NT = normal NT overcall, control in H
2C = normal overcall
2D = normal overcall
2H = Michaels cuebid
...
I dont get the problem with "too complicated" or "not complete" if you use this defense...
"It may be rude to leave to go to the bathroom, but it's downright stupid to sit there and piss yourself" - blackshoe
#11
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 15,495
- Joined: 2003-February-13
- Gender:Male
- Location:Natick, MA
-
Interests:Travel
Cooking
Brewing
Hiking
Posted 2003-December-01, 11:07
Hi Ben
Let me go one step further
I'm willing to bet a reasonable amount of money that you CAN"T get the convention committee to approve a defense to MOSCITO's transfer opening bids.
1D = 4+ Hearts, might have longer minor
1H = 4+ Spades, might have a longer minor
1S = 4+ Diamonds, might have longer clubs
I'm willing to bet between $1 and $50.
I'm willing to give you 5:1 odds.
In other words, if you bet $50 and you are able to get the Convention Committee to approve defense, I will pay you $250. If you fail to get a defense approved, you would pay me $50.
To make it sporting, I'm willing to give you 10 weeks.
Feeling lucky?
Let me go one step further
I'm willing to bet a reasonable amount of money that you CAN"T get the convention committee to approve a defense to MOSCITO's transfer opening bids.
1D = 4+ Hearts, might have longer minor
1H = 4+ Spades, might have a longer minor
1S = 4+ Diamonds, might have longer clubs
I'm willing to bet between $1 and $50.
I'm willing to give you 5:1 odds.
In other words, if you bet $50 and you are able to get the Convention Committee to approve defense, I will pay you $250. If you fail to get a defense approved, you would pay me $50.
To make it sporting, I'm willing to give you 10 weeks.
Feeling lucky?
Alderaan delenda est
#12
- mmm Duvel
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 10,728
- Joined: 2003-July-30
- Gender:Male
- Location:Belgium
- Interests:Duvel, Whisky
Posted 2003-December-01, 11:13
Quote
Feeling lucky?
Lol! I dont think defending against 1D or 1H opening is difficult, but defending against the 1S opening is possibly harder because you cant bid 1M anymore! Maybe there's the problem.
"It may be rude to leave to go to the bathroom, but it's downright stupid to sit there and piss yourself" - blackshoe
#13
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 1,422
- Joined: 2003-February-13
Posted 2003-December-01, 11:50
I really wonder how you are able to take this monthly discussion serious. It is the same arguments and near to same persons. Those watching BBO Forum regularly knows your views.
I think it would be nice to see you do something about your problems. Take the poles as an example. They set their rules and play with and against each other. How about that?
- ACBL is a US-body and therefore their rulings are completely obsolete to most BBO members
- ACBL has no authority on internet - least of all on BBO
- I think you will be able to play any system you like in your local club if you have a partner for that
- If you do things in a serious way you can play any system or version you can find partners for on BBO
- Even many new members on BBO I still have problems to find partners for that kind of systems or to find tables to kibitz where such systems are played
- When I occasionally see the honoured debatours here playing on BBO I mostly see you playing with partners preferring standard classic
I think it would be nice to see you do something about your problems. Take the poles as an example. They set their rules and play with and against each other. How about that?
#14
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 1,156
- Joined: 2003-July-03
- Location:Portland, Oregon
Posted 2003-December-01, 12:17
My regular lunchtime partner and I play a modified version of
Tresboof (forcing pass, 1C=hearts,1D=spades,1H=fert,...) with
symmetric relays. Our lunchtime opponents range from novice
to advanced. When we first starting playing this system against
them, they asked how to defend against it. We gave them the
"X=shows suit bid,1 of the implied suit=like a T/O X, others normal"
defense to our transfer openings and they haven't complained
once about it being too complicated or incomplete. They do complain
about how difficult the 1H fert bid is to defend against but it doesn't
stop them from playing with us. My point in this story is that some
pretty poor players don't mind the system too much yet we can't
play this system in our local club, which I have to give some credit
because they are pretty liberal with conventions. My partner and I
have tried a few times to play a non-forcing pass version of the
system but we've given up because it is so inferior to the forcing
pass version.
Again, I reiterate what I've said before with respect to Free's comments.
Some people play socially and others play for blood. We need
different sections for these two classes of players and should allow
almost everything in the blood section. With respect to Ben's question
about inferences, it is true that when encountered with a different
system it is harder for opponents to draw inferences. However, a
non-precision aware pair is at the same disadvantage against a
precision pair. Nothing in the rules state that this great game must
not require studying! If you get bad results against precision then go
learn it so you can draw proper inferences. You should have meta-agreements
for defense against various kinds of bids and strange bids should be
pre-alerted to give opps time to devise a simple defense.
I've heard enough stories of the official ACBL defense approval
committee that I have no faith in the process. Too many times I've
heard of there being an official defense for some particular bid
semantics but no official defense for the same semantic when the
bid used to show it is one step lower, e.g., 2D rather than 2H. This
is fairly non-sensical to me.
Tresboof (forcing pass, 1C=hearts,1D=spades,1H=fert,...) with
symmetric relays. Our lunchtime opponents range from novice
to advanced. When we first starting playing this system against
them, they asked how to defend against it. We gave them the
"X=shows suit bid,1 of the implied suit=like a T/O X, others normal"
defense to our transfer openings and they haven't complained
once about it being too complicated or incomplete. They do complain
about how difficult the 1H fert bid is to defend against but it doesn't
stop them from playing with us. My point in this story is that some
pretty poor players don't mind the system too much yet we can't
play this system in our local club, which I have to give some credit
because they are pretty liberal with conventions. My partner and I
have tried a few times to play a non-forcing pass version of the
system but we've given up because it is so inferior to the forcing
pass version.
Again, I reiterate what I've said before with respect to Free's comments.
Some people play socially and others play for blood. We need
different sections for these two classes of players and should allow
almost everything in the blood section. With respect to Ben's question
about inferences, it is true that when encountered with a different
system it is harder for opponents to draw inferences. However, a
non-precision aware pair is at the same disadvantage against a
precision pair. Nothing in the rules state that this great game must
not require studying! If you get bad results against precision then go
learn it so you can draw proper inferences. You should have meta-agreements
for defense against various kinds of bids and strange bids should be
pre-alerted to give opps time to devise a simple defense.
I've heard enough stories of the official ACBL defense approval
committee that I have no faith in the process. Too many times I've
heard of there being an official defense for some particular bid
semantics but no official defense for the same semantic when the
bid used to show it is one step lower, e.g., 2D rather than 2H. This
is fairly non-sensical to me.
#15
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 2,143
- Joined: 2003-May-02
- Location:Buenos Aires, Argentina
Posted 2003-December-01, 12:23
Actually you are in a better position than me, at least you have the regulations written in your countries...
In the third-world NBO we have here in Argentina there're no written regulations nor webpage or book of any color. What we have is a guy that acts like a "systems oracle" the procedure is as follows:
- You play whatever you want until some old lady complains.
- When the lady complains the TD forbids your system inmediately and you are told to ask the "oracle" about your system. (You've been old-ladied)
- This guy, if he is there, carefully analizes what you play and says yes/no.
- You tell the TD your system has passed the Oracle examination and can play it again.
If you want to have fun this actually happened:
Playing Moscito as always (nothing new), I open 1h, my mother relays with 1s, an old lady bids 3h "to play" we double and collect 800. TD called, 1s relay properly alerted is described as "strange". The whole system is banned. We finish the round with vanilla 2/1 and have to visit "The Oracle"
Luis - Can I play 1s - 1N as relay?
Oracle: No, you can't
Luis - Why?
Oracle: Because you don't say anything about your hand
Luis - But can I play a forcing NT ?
Oracle: Yes of course
Luis - And what is the difference? You don't say anything either.
Oracle: Oh, I see, well I guess you can play a 1s-1N relay then. Is a special case.
Luis - Whay aboout 1h-1s relay?
Oracle - No, you can't play that
Luis - Why?
Oracle - There's no defense against such a bid
Luis - Ok, can I invert the meaning of 1s and 1N to a 1h opening?
Oracle - Mmmmm
Luis - I think you are playint that convention Mr Oracle
Oracle - Oh, yes, you can play that. It's very common.
Luis - What's the difference then with my 1s relay ?
Oracle - Er.... well..... I guess you can play THAT relay then.
Luis - Thank you Mr Oracle
Oracle - You are welcome, do you want a candy?
Luis - Er... no thanks.
So after carefully examination the 1d-1h relay was banned because you can't defend against that while you do can defend against 1h-1s or 1s-1N. Isn't it amazing?
"You can play whatever you want without a CC as long as it is properly explained " (TD literal quote)
If you want to have fun, come to play to the third world, you can buy half the country too in your visit!
Luis
In the third-world NBO we have here in Argentina there're no written regulations nor webpage or book of any color. What we have is a guy that acts like a "systems oracle" the procedure is as follows:
- You play whatever you want until some old lady complains.
- When the lady complains the TD forbids your system inmediately and you are told to ask the "oracle" about your system. (You've been old-ladied)
- This guy, if he is there, carefully analizes what you play and says yes/no.
- You tell the TD your system has passed the Oracle examination and can play it again.
If you want to have fun this actually happened:
Playing Moscito as always (nothing new), I open 1h, my mother relays with 1s, an old lady bids 3h "to play" we double and collect 800. TD called, 1s relay properly alerted is described as "strange". The whole system is banned. We finish the round with vanilla 2/1 and have to visit "The Oracle"
Luis - Can I play 1s - 1N as relay?
Oracle: No, you can't
Luis - Why?
Oracle: Because you don't say anything about your hand
Luis - But can I play a forcing NT ?
Oracle: Yes of course
Luis - And what is the difference? You don't say anything either.
Oracle: Oh, I see, well I guess you can play a 1s-1N relay then. Is a special case.
Luis - Whay aboout 1h-1s relay?
Oracle - No, you can't play that
Luis - Why?
Oracle - There's no defense against such a bid
Luis - Ok, can I invert the meaning of 1s and 1N to a 1h opening?
Oracle - Mmmmm
Luis - I think you are playint that convention Mr Oracle
Oracle - Oh, yes, you can play that. It's very common.
Luis - What's the difference then with my 1s relay ?
Oracle - Er.... well..... I guess you can play THAT relay then.
Luis - Thank you Mr Oracle
Oracle - You are welcome, do you want a candy?
Luis - Er... no thanks.
So after carefully examination the 1d-1h relay was banned because you can't defend against that while you do can defend against 1h-1s or 1s-1N. Isn't it amazing?
"You can play whatever you want without a CC as long as it is properly explained " (TD literal quote)
If you want to have fun, come to play to the third world, you can buy half the country too in your visit!
Luis
The legend of the black octogon.
#16
- Group: Admin
- Posts: 14,566
- Joined: 2003-February-13
- Gender:Male
- Location:Amelia Island, FL
- Interests:Bridge, what else?
Posted 2003-December-01, 12:47
Quote
1D = 4+ Hearts, might have longer minor
1H = 4+ Spades, might have a longer minor
1S = 4+ Diamonds, might have longer clubs
[Bet stuff deleted ]Feeling lucky?
Well, of course your system is a lot more than just 1D shows hearts, and 1H shows spades, and 1S shows diamonds. Immediate seat over that can be handled ok. But your moscito goes further into the netherlands...
1S-P-2D for instance, where 2D now shows spades. Is there a recommend defense to this? I would use a dbl to show the other two suits, but it could clearly cause problems at the table. How about your
Or your,
1S - P - 1NT being a relay, game invite or stronger asking for more information? This is exactly the type of RELAYS that are not allowed on mid-chart. The relay has to be game force, or it is not allowed.
or your 1D-P-1H and 1h-p-1S fall into the same relay without promise game force values.
So your recommend defense is incomplete, and you run into trouble with the strict requirement about stregnth of relay. Then you run into trouble not only with the transfer opening, but all the non-natural responses to those opening bids.
So will I take your bet? No I will not. While I am certain that a reasonable defense can be written up for the opening bid, and there is no reason such a transfer opening bid should not be allowed, I have no doubt the whole complex you play has gotten the convention committee turned off to reading about it. In addition, how many people are clamoring to have this bid legalized? I mean, it certainly doesn't appear very popular. Luis and others do play versions of moscito without it, so I think you are in a very small minority. That is an additional strike against getting it approved. If I was in position to approve it I would. But am I willing to fight for it? nope, especially not with the additional baggage you drap on to it.
Ben
--Ben--
#17
- Group: Admin
- Posts: 14,566
- Joined: 2003-February-13
- Gender:Male
- Location:Amelia Island, FL
- Interests:Bridge, what else?
Posted 2003-December-01, 13:07
Quote
With respect to Ben's question about inferences, it is true that when encountered with a different
system it is harder for opponents to draw inferences. However, a non-precision aware pair is at the same disadvantage against a precision pair. Nothing in the rules state that this great game must
not require studying!
system it is harder for opponents to draw inferences. However, a non-precision aware pair is at the same disadvantage against a precision pair. Nothing in the rules state that this great game must
not require studying!
With all due respect Todd, I have to disagree. When you play in a ACBL Limited convention chart event, there is a very limited number of things you will run into. You can (should) review what is allowed on the limit convention. The first thing allowed is a 1 club opening bid as unlimited and forcing with one negative response. There are other things allowed. At each level, you step up in what is allowed. For instance, if you are playing in a mid-level convention chart event, you had better be prepared for raptor 1NT overcalls.
This is the advantage of having the Convention Charts. It gives the competitors time to PREPARE for what they might FACE before the event. When they have time to sit down and discuss with their partners. There is nothing more frustrating for an SAYC beginner pair in the B/I forum tournment to hear a 2NT opening bid - then an alert along with the explaination that it is a weak hand with both minors. They have no frame of reference for how to deal with this bid. They don't know if pass then double is stronger than initial double, they are unsure what a 3C or 3D bid by them would mean to their partner. Of course if you played in a mid-chart event, you should have a prepared defense for this bid. That is the entire point.
I wonder if when you described to your lunch buddies what do do when you open 1D or 1S, you bother to give them a decent defense when you make a forcing pass? I only wonder becasue you didn't mention it... The key is to not wait for a good hand to bid, I open the suit I don't hold and I do so light immediately after a forcing pass.
Ben
--Ben--
#18
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 15,495
- Joined: 2003-February-13
- Gender:Male
- Location:Natick, MA
-
Interests:Travel
Cooking
Brewing
Hiking
Posted 2003-December-01, 13:15
Actually, Klause, I've done quite alot.
#1. I have pretty much withdrawn from ACBL bridge, preferring to play online and overseas. [I was only involved in this most recent solicitation because Paul Marston wanted to play MOSCITO in the New Orleans Nationals. Event so, Tim Goodwin was the one who made the actual submissions and worked with the Committee.
#2. When I do play "face-to-face" games here in the US, it is under very controlled circumstances. Not entirely coincidentially, my "home" District uses the ACBL Superchart for Flight A KO events. Also, the local clubs that I play at have anything goes systems policies for their pairs events.
#3. I like to think that I have done a pretty good job writing up a set of notes documenting MOSCITO. I think that the latest round of edits is a substantial improvement over what has come before. [I am simplifying the presentation by focusing on a single "version" of the system and leaving out all the bells and whistles. Someday, I might even finish the bleeding document. [By now, I am quite convinced that completing the document will lead to a brand new verison of the system, but thats another story]
Regardless, I am somewhat bitter about not being able to play this system in most venues in the US. As a result, I tend to get somewhat emotional when people explain to me that it should be easy to get a defense approved.
#1. I have pretty much withdrawn from ACBL bridge, preferring to play online and overseas. [I was only involved in this most recent solicitation because Paul Marston wanted to play MOSCITO in the New Orleans Nationals. Event so, Tim Goodwin was the one who made the actual submissions and worked with the Committee.
#2. When I do play "face-to-face" games here in the US, it is under very controlled circumstances. Not entirely coincidentially, my "home" District uses the ACBL Superchart for Flight A KO events. Also, the local clubs that I play at have anything goes systems policies for their pairs events.
#3. I like to think that I have done a pretty good job writing up a set of notes documenting MOSCITO. I think that the latest round of edits is a substantial improvement over what has come before. [I am simplifying the presentation by focusing on a single "version" of the system and leaving out all the bells and whistles. Someday, I might even finish the bleeding document. [By now, I am quite convinced that completing the document will lead to a brand new verison of the system, but thats another story]
Regardless, I am somewhat bitter about not being able to play this system in most venues in the US. As a result, I tend to get somewhat emotional when people explain to me that it should be easy to get a defense approved.
Alderaan delenda est
#19
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 2,143
- Joined: 2003-May-02
- Location:Buenos Aires, Argentina
Posted 2003-December-01, 13:23
Quote
Actually, Klause, I've done quite alot.
#1. I have pretty much withdrawn from ACBL bridge, preferring to play online and overseas. [I was only involved in this most recent solicitation because Paul Marston wanted to play MOSCITO in the New Orleans Nationals. Event so, Tim Goodwin was the one who made the actual submissions and worked with the Committee.
#2. When I do play "face-to-face" games here in the US, it is under very controlled circumstances. Not entirely coincidentially, my "home" District uses the ACBL Superchart for Flight A KO events. Also, the local clubs that I play at have anything goes systems policies for their pairs events.
#3. I like to think that I have done a pretty good job writing up a set of notes documenting MOSCITO. I think that the latest round of edits is a substantial improvement over what has come before. [I am simplifying the presentation by focusing on a single "version" of the system and leaving out all the bells and whistles. Someday, I might even finish the bleeding document. [By now, I am quite convinced that completing the document will lead to a brand new verison of the system, but thats another story]
Regardless, I am somewhat bitter about not being able to play this system in most venues in the US. As a result, I tend to get somewhat emotional when people explain to me that it should be easy to get a defense approved.
Well I guess that if you want to play in the ACBL land you have to prepare a system that follows their rules. That's the reason why I play the German version of Moscito instead of the "better, funnier, etc" Marston variation.
The version I play is 100% compatible with the regulations and it can be used as a very nice way to introduce a new system that players can try out without being banned.
The legend of the black octogon.
#20
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 15,495
- Joined: 2003-February-13
- Gender:Male
- Location:Natick, MA
-
Interests:Travel
Cooking
Brewing
Hiking
Posted 2003-December-01, 13:29
Hi Ben
I find it somewhat amusing that both of the examples that you use in your latest post are GCC legal:
Raptor 1NT overcalls are clearly permitted under
3. NOTRUMP OVERCALL for either
a) two-suit takeout showing at least 5-4 distribution and at least one known suit (At the four level or higher there is no requirement to have a known suit.)
A 2NT opening showing both minors is permitted under
7. OPENING NOTRUMP BID AT THE TWO LEVEL OR HIGHER indicating at least 5-4 distribution in the minors.
I find it somewhat amusing that both of the examples that you use in your latest post are GCC legal:
Raptor 1NT overcalls are clearly permitted under
3. NOTRUMP OVERCALL for either
a) two-suit takeout showing at least 5-4 distribution and at least one known suit (At the four level or higher there is no requirement to have a known suit.)
A 2NT opening showing both minors is permitted under
7. OPENING NOTRUMP BID AT THE TWO LEVEL OR HIGHER indicating at least 5-4 distribution in the minors.
Alderaan delenda est