[the hog]

Aguahombre:
A random 1S overcall is truly that. Sometimes you bid 1S and sometimes you didn't. The composition of the 13 cards you hold in your hand is irrelevant, as was vulnerability.


AVM:
"If randomness is really desired, why not have an agreement like "1♠ shows a hand which contains more 2s than 3s""
This is NOT random!
personally I don't see that difficulty in policing an agreement should be a requiste for banning it.

[Vampyr]

The_Hog, on May 4 2010, 02:19 AM, said:

A random 1S overcall is truly that. Sometimes you bid 1S and sometimes you didn't. The composition of the 13 cards you hold in your hand is irrelevant, as was vulnerability.

So how did you make the decision whether to do it or not?

[aguahombre]

Vampyr, on May 3 2010, 09:06 PM, said:

The_Hog, on May 4 2010, 02:19 AM, said:

A random 1S overcall is truly that. Sometimes you bid 1S and sometimes you didn't. The composition of the 13 cards you hold in your hand is irrelevant, as was vulnerability.

So how did you make the decision whether to do it or not?

He consulted our English teacher.

[the hog]

Vampyr, on May 4 2010, 10:06 AM, said:

The_Hog, on May 4 2010, 02:19 AM, said:

A random 1S overcall is truly that. Sometimes you bid 1S and sometimes you didn't. The composition of the 13 cards you hold in your hand is irrelevant, as was vulnerability.

So how did you make the decision whether to do it or not?

Whenever we felt like it. Totally up to the individual.
Had you known my pd at the time, you would know that he really was random, part of the time to annoy me.

As an example, not that this has anything to do with this thread, we played a relay system:

1C 1H
2D 3D

1C = 16+
1H = S 9+
2D = H+C, longer H - Reverse relay
3D = double reverse relay, showing s, (his orig suit), 5233 and 9-11 HCP

The 3D bid was totally undiscussed, but he expected me to work it out at the table -"Of course, what else can it mean?"

[Free]

The_Hog, on May 4 2010, 02:19 AM, said:

AVM:
"If randomness is really desired, why not have an agreement like "1♠ shows a hand which contains more 2s than 3s""
This is NOT random!

Indeed. The above method is deterministic: do I have more 2s than 3s? Yes => bid 1♠ ; No => bid something else

The point of randomizing is basically one of 2 methods:
- you bid 1♠ every time, whatever you hold. Every other bid is not allowed.
- every hand you hold can either bid 1♠ or something else, whatever you choose at that time.

Btw, if random methods are banned, you can basically give any bid "some" explanation. "At least as many 2s than 3s, or more 3s than 2s" is simple to cover all hand types, but you would have to make it more complex so it doesn't seem like it covers all hand types at first sight. Make it something like "0-7 ♠s or a ♠ prime number (2, 3, 5, 7, J or K)". Although it doesn't seem that way, it's impossible to create a hand with 8+♠ which doesn't contain a ♠ prime number... Or if you want to overcall 1♠ in every situation, you can just describe it as "0-12 ♠" and get away with it. With 13 ♠s you'll overcall something else, so it's not random anymore.

[the hog]

This is a moot point anyway, as a random 1S is not a good method. These days I would play canape overcalls if allowed.