[principe45]

My pard open:

1♥ (7 POINTS)

cards:
♠ 9-8
♥ A-10-8-7-6
♣ Q-J-10-9-6-2

BIDING:
1♥ - X - XX - 1♦
2♣ - PASS - PASS - 3♦
PASS - PASS - 4♣ - X

FINAL 4♣ X +1

Opps claim FD a table and this assign 40-60 % for incorrect open bid

I think 1♥ psichiche... possible ?

[the hog]

This sounds like a psyche to me. It would be helpful to see all the hands to see
1) whether the bidding is comnsistent with a psyche being fielded - though this does not look likely with a 4C bid
2) why the opponents eventually doubled.

The bidding by the opps is ridiculous anyway Firstly one thinks his hand is only worth 1? (S maybe), after his partner's X, then he changes his mind and thinks its worth 3D and then thinks it is worth a X.

Did the TD give a reason for an adjustment? "Incorrect" opening bid sounds strange, surely I can open whatever I like.

Addendum. Is there a regulation in print somewhere for this tournament that I must have 8 points to open ?

[principe45]

TD has declared that it is not possible to open of 1 with less
than 8 points !!!

Ty

SUD 7 (PTS) - NORD - 10 (PTS) -
EST - 13 (PTS) - OVEST - 10 (PTS)



RESULT ALL HANDS TOURNEY THIS BOARD:

8----> 3♦ X +1
6----> 3NT -2
2----> 3♣ + 1
5----> 5♦ X -1
1----> 4♣ X +1

[Free]

Actually, if it's a partnership agreement that you can open such hands, you're playing a HUM! Ofcourse, I would only consider this as a light opening.

Btw, you have the right to psych, so if he considers this a psych, the score stands! But if the rules clearly say you can't open with less than 8 HCP, then you're wrong ofcourse.

[luke warm]

i believe, in acbl land, 8 hcp is a minimum for a 1 opening

[the hog]

So if you add the J of S to the given hand this is a legal opening? Spare me!
Do you know for sure if this is a regulation, Jimmy?

[pbleighton]

Ron - from the GCC, under Disallowed:

6. Opening one bids which by partnership agreement could show fewer
than 8 HCP. (Not applicable to a psych.)

At least it's not 12

Peter

[inquiry]

Ron, you can not open this in ACBL events, despite the 26 zar points (7 hcp + 2 control + 17 distriutional). I would OPEN This in any and all events OTHER THAN an acbl one. The fact that the director said 7 hcp could not be opened, I suspect, means it was an ACBL event.

There is no way that opening this hand is an HUM in my opinion, because this is simly an evalation issue...to open this as ZAR count suggest you evaluate this hand as being worth roughly 13 hcp.

Ben

[Free]

One of the rules of a HUM:
c ) By partnership agreement an opening bid at the one level may be made with values a king or more below avarage strength

So IF it's a partnership agreement, you play a HUM, if it's not a partnership agreement, then it's a light opening or a psych, depending on how you look at it...

[myfish]

One of the rules of a HUM:
c ) By partnership agreement an opening bid at the one level may be made with values a king or more below avarage strength

hope i understand it...
the average strength in bridge is 10HCP
and a king below average strength is 10-3=7HCP
which is what the hand has
furthermore,the rules of HUM didn't say we have to use HCP to calculate the hand

One of the rules of a HUM:
By parntership agreement an opening bid at the one level may be weaker than pass
you may pass with 10HCP but you bid with 7 HCP!!

if we count on HCP...the opening is illegal than....

[hrothgar]

Few Comments here:

First and foremost, it is impossible to make any kind of informed judgement without knowing the Conditions of Contest for the event in question.

Certain Zonal authorities have Conditions of Contest that relate to the example hand. For example, the ACBL's General Convention Chart (GCC) contains the following clause:

"Disallowed
...
6. Opening one bids which by partnership agreement could show less
than 8 HCP. (Not applicable to a psych)"

This regulation clearly bans players from having a partnership agreementto open hands like

♠ 9-8
♥ A-10-8-7-6
♣ Q-J-10-9-6-2

However, it is very important to note that the ban pertains to the partnership agreement and not the opening. From my perspective, any ruling under ACBL regulations need to focus on this aspect.

For what its worth, Tim Goodwin and I once tried to challenge this rule in the ACBL. We were playing Magic Diamond, which systemically allowed for 1 level openings with exceptional hands. I opened a 7 count and we called the director on ourselves, trying to generate a test case. Unfortunately, the Director's in question refused to enforce the relevant rules.

[Chamaco]

inquiry, on Aug 9 2004, 11:30 AM, said:

The fact that the director said 7 hcp could not be opened, I suspect, means it was an ACBL event.

No, it was an italian federal tourny, I think OTB (from what I could understand from principe's a bit chaotic post).

In Italy, you cannot open at the 1 level with less than 8 hcp, even if it's a psyche.
At the 1 level, you are allowed to psyche distribution in one of a suit, provided you hold at least 8 hcp.
E.g., if u have 8+ hcp, u may open 1 of a suit where u are short;
1NT psyches are not allowed altogether (e.g. you may deviate by max 2 hcp from the range and you have to stick to specific distributions).

This applies of course to low-midchart flight events.

I am not saying I agree with all of the above, just stating the rules.

[mikestar]

To my mind, this is a light opening bid. As Ben pointed out, it counts 26 Zar points. It also has 7 losers. This is a clear opening bid if your partnership does not have defensive value requirements for one level openings.

If your partnership has this agreement, opening this particular hand is illegal in ACBL (and apparently in Italy). If your partnership agreement does call for defensive values then this would be classed as a psyche and therefor legal in ACBL as long as you don't have a partnership history that would consitute an implicit agreement.

If we assume that the opening bid was correctly ruled illegal under the conditions of contest or applicable sponsoring organization regulations, then adjusting your score to Ave- is correct. Note that I am not defending these regulations--they should be done away with.

However the Ave+ award for the opponents is wrong. As Ron pointed out, they didn't play bridge and so lose their right to protection. Their score should stand.

As a director I would make the ruling I outlined above and apologize to you for the idiocy of the regulation. As an opponent, I would never call the director about this bidding and would try to dissuade my partner if he wished to.

[principe45]

I have intentional to make to be born the losing dispute why I
think that an opening with 6 must be valid also to level of one to
prescind from the score. This old and obsolete regulations the
bridge modern must the not only preview also the account of losing and
the points papers. In the specific hand opening to level one I have
anticipated the adversaries and realized the better one contracted of
the tourney. One final consideration. After the first turn of bid
the west it very well knew the distribution of the points and could
call the director endured and not to fine game.

[Trpltrbl]

If it was ACBL tourney then you do get penalized for opening at 1 level with less then 8 HCP, but I disagree with the ruling. The opps got 60 % for trying to 2 way it.
Hoping it would go down and if not call the director and complain.
I would give both sides A- or 40%.

Mike