[chasetb]

I know that the ACBL is generally criticized for being way too conservative and disallowing some stuff that while isn't difficult, is artificial. While looking over the GCC, I noticed a great deal of 'insanity'. While there are too many things to list, these 5 are, in my opinion, needed to be changed IMMEDIATELY. They aren't ranked, but if I were to rank them, the list would stay the same, going from least important to me to most important.

1.) GCC - 2♣ and 2♦ opening bids showing at least 5-4 in the minors, any strength (Alertable). If the range includes 9 (or less) HCP, then it also falls under the “Weak 2 bids” as outlined under Rule 7 in “Disallowed”. These bids are not hard to understand or explain, nor are they difficult to defend against in my opinion.

2.) GCC - Any response to an Opening Bid that promises Invitational or better values. This includes 1NT, but over a 1NT that guaranteed Invitational or better values, 2♣ by opener MUST show Clubs. By Invitational, any hand with 11+ HCP, good 10 HCP hands, 9 HCP (A + K) where the suit shown must be at least KQ10xx with an outside A or KJ in the same suit, and 8 HCP where the suit shown must be at least AKJxxx. You generally don't need to bid when the opposition have shown 23+ HCP, and the rule also gives greater definition to what qualifies as an “Invitational hand”.

3.) GCC – Any response to an Opening Bid that shows at least 6 points (NOT HCP) and 3-card support or better for the suit opened (Alertable). An example would be 1♠ - (2♦ or 2♥) showing 8-10 HCP and exactly 3-card support. Again, this is not difficult to defend against, and it allows the opponents to interfere at a lower level than before, whether to compete or just to lead-direct.

4.) GCC – A response of 1♠ to a 1♥ Opening showing 4 or less Spades, Forcing, and a response of 1NT to a 1♥ Opening showing (4)5+ Spades, and also Forcing (known to many as Kaplan Inversion/Interchange, KI for short, and Alertable). This allows the opponents to show Spades at the one level when Spades have been denied, and very rarely will you want to show Spades after Responder has promised (4)5+ as in the sequence 1♥ - 1♠.

5.) SuperChart (but only for USBF qualifiers, the Vanderbilt, and the Spingold (unlimited) ) – Allow Forcing Pass systems. In any seat, a 1♣ or 1♦ fert bid (a bid showing 0-7 HCP) is allowed. In 3rd and 4th seats ONLY, a 1♥ fert bid is allowed.

The final suggestion will not affect over 99% of the membership, but I feel very strongly about it. It's a compromise in that those who do not want it in any way will hate the fact that it is legal and those who want it will hate having to possibly their system, but at major International events a few partnerships do play this. Only the very top players/partnerships will be affected, and it will be a positive change, giving experience that otherwise is impossible to gain otherwise.

* I only have 98 masterpoints, but I intend to regularly compete in future NABCs, and the Bermuda Bowl as well. I plan on joining Zia in the 'guys who started learning bridge in their 20s but still managed to be the best' group.

[eyhung]

I'd suggest changes that, instead of being based on how easy they are to deal with, are more based on frequency of use (and thus are easier to defend against based on frequency). And then it might actively influence a larger pool of players than the scientists.

My top choices would be:

1) Allow Woolsey over NT as GCC. Fairly common in high-level bridge nowadays, and even in clubs in my area.

2) Allow Polish Twos as GCC. I don't play them myself but they look useful, are straightforward to defend against (treat them like weak 2s), and again, a significant # of (mostly European) pairs play them.

3) 1m - 2H as an invitational balanced hand or a strong jump shift as GCC. Usually the opponents don't want to bid after this start, and it's pretty useful as a constructive tool.

4) 3NT Reverse Namyats (showing a good 4M opener) as MidChart. Right now it appears it's SuperChart which seems fairly ludicrous to me. This convention is not common but moving from Super to Mid would be a good start.

Distant 5th) Allow Multi-2D as GCC. We gotta start learning sometime -- the rest of the world feels like they can deal with it.

[lamford]

My top choice would be to allow intermediate pass (11-15) any shape, and the response of 1C asking "have you psyched?", with the 'rebid' of 1D, saying "yes".

[blackshoe]

"Reverse Namyats" does not, I guess, require a solid suit. If your agreement does require a solid suit (Kantar 3NT), it's GCC legal.

[aguahombre]

Rather than change what is contained in the GCC vs. the Mid-Chart:

I would encourage clubs to continue to allow such mid-chart conventions as they see fit and discourage them from disallowing any GCC conventions.

Those running Sectional events with no masterpoint restriction should be treated the same as clubs, as to autonomy about conventions used in those open or top flight events.

Regional and higher events with no ceiling MP restriction should be forced to allow Mid-Chart methods. This includes any level of qualifying (e.g., grass-roots rounds of NAOP and NAOT).

Some of the above might already be in force, but I cannot seem to find clarification on the ACBL site about any level above which Mid-Chart Conventions are allowed. The conditions of contest on specific events sometimes have that information.

[Vampyr]

aguahombre, on 2012-January-30, 10:30, said:

Rather than change what is contained in the GCC vs. the Mid-Chart:

Yes, it does seem simpler to reduce the number of events using the GCC.

[barmar]

Vampyr, on 2012-January-30, 11:21, said:

Yes, it does seem simpler to reduce the number of events using the GCC.

Keep on dreaming

[blackshoe]

Quote

From the Mid-Chart: Provided it has been included in tournament advertising, this chart (or any part) may apply to any sectionally or regionally rated event or tournament at the sponsor's option. The requirement for advertising does not extend to use in Flt. A or KO brackets which contain no team with an average masterpoint holding of less than a 1500.

From the Superchart: This chart (or any part) may be used at a sectionally or regionally rated event or tournament at sponsor’s option in any event with 12-board or longer segments provided this has been included in tournament advertising.

So either chart can be used at any Sectional or Regional, provided that it's advertised beforehand (and in some cases even that is not required). But AFAIK, most such tournaments, at least around here, don't allow either one. And I haven't seen any CoC published by regional or sectional TOs either. Presumably they rely on the ACBL's (which, iirc, don't mention which charts are allowed). Edit: Nope, I'm wrong. The General CoC say "The ACBL General Convention Chart will govern bidding and playing methods unless the Sponsoring Organization has announced or published that the Mid-Chart and/or Super-Chart will be permitted."

I'd love to see more Mid-Chart events, but barmar's right, it's a pipe dream.

The extreme latitude given to clubs can result in GCC legal agreements being banned. I don't think that's such a good idea either.

I note that the Limited Convention Chart is only applicable to games with an upper limit of at most 20 MPs. The implication, to me, is that anyone who's played long enough to have more than 20 MPs ought to be able to handle the GCC, but there are clearly some people who don't think so, and would probably extend it to say all NLMs.

This post has been edited by blackshoe: 2012-January-30, 14:17
Reason for edit: correct an error

[aguahombre]

I do hope the "advertising" just means announcing before the event---like in a flyer at the site or a daily bulletin....probably another pipe dream.

[blackshoe]

"Advertising" means in the flyers put out before the event, and usually available on the ACBL website and local (Unit or District) websites.

Last time I suggested some Mid-Chart events at one of our local Sectionals, I just got blank looks.

[chasetb]

Eugene, I'm happy to see that you posted in here - big fan of BW. I tend to agree with you that I feel those things in your post should be moved up (I can't believe I left out Namyats 3NT). My problem with this, even coming as a 24 year old, is that 57.3% of all ACBL members are UNDER 300 points, and 81.11% are UNDER 1000 points.

I come from a horrible area on the Ohio-WV border - the local game only has 2 games a week, averaging between 5-7 tables depending on the day and the season. Four of the past five years, there were 0 games in January and February. I'm the only person within a 50 mile radius that plays Precision - I've seen people with 1500 points tremble after hearing I'm playing Precision, just imagine hearing that I'm using 2H opener as 5+ Hearts and 4+ in a minor. While it might have a high frequency, I can't see too many people using it (at first anyways), and we all know how inconsistent most ACBL directors (no offense).

Woolsey isn't common in Pittsburgh or Cleveland, and from what I've read people can't even follow the rules when they are playing Woolsey, to pre-alert it before the round starts.

Agua, I agree with your first post as well, but again with Mid-chart or higher it comes down to the directors being inconsistent and people inbetween the experts and the novices not properly pre-alerting it, or not having defenses, etcetera.

[bluejak]

I have played all my life in small bridge clubs with some very poor players. A 2♥ opening that shows hearts frightens no-one. It does not matter what else it shows.

To me the strangest rules the ACBL have are disallowing a 2♠ opening that shows spades and another suit at MidChart, when it is allowed in novice bridge in England, and having this crazy idea of needing six board rounds before you allow the Multi at MidChart.

Note: the next post will be someone telling me I am wrong, and that a 2♠ opening that shows spades and another suit is allowed at MidChart: please try checking more carefully.

[Phil]

chasetb, on 2012-January-31, 02:02, said:

I've seen people with 1500 points tremble after hearing I'm playing Precision.

These people have the same reaction when they look at a plate of sushi, or just before getting on an airplane.

[mycroft]

Heh, I've had people with 1500 MP ask me why, after 1♦-1♥; 1NT Alert, asked and explained as 15-17 balanced, we didn't just open 1NT. I actually get fewer issues playing Precision.

[blackshoe]

A local player once said to me "I have over 2000 masterpoints, and I can tell you that anyone who thinks S Kxxx H Kxxx D xxx C xx is a valid raise to 2♠ is out of his mind".

[bluejak]

If anyone started a sentence saying how many masterpoints he had I would not listen to the rest of the sentence.

[aguahombre]

bluejak, on 2012-February-02, 09:08, said:

If anyone started a sentence saying how many masterpoints he had I would not listen to the rest of the sentence.

Agree with the point you are making. People who use masterpoint accumulation to impress us that their argument must be valid are a turn-off.

However, if someone starts a sentence with, "I have a whole 2 masterpoints, but..." I am all ears.

[blackshoe]

bluejak, on 2012-February-02, 09:08, said:

If anyone started a sentence saying how many masterpoints he had I would not listen to the rest of the sentence.

The funny thing is that until he came up with that drivel I had thought he was a pretty decent player. I lost all respect for his bridge opinions, at least, at that point though.