[nullve]

Maybe this belongs in the Laws and Rulings forum, but the simple idea is that since the Comic/Gardener 1N overcall is WBF illegal (isn't it?), maybe we can get something WBF legal by "swapping" the meaning of X and 1N, as in:

(1x)-?:

X = like Comic 1N, but stronger hands possible
1N = "takeout" of x, but NF

The 1N overcall will then be similar to NTO/R.U.N.T, which I've never heard are WBF illegal, but maybe it has to promise 4+ cards in a specified suit?

[nullve]

Maybe

(1♠)-X-?:

P = possible
1N = 4- H, to play opposite 15-17 bal. / relay opposite weak hands
...P = 15-17 bal.
...2♣+ = weak hands (usually)
2♣ = P/C / 5+ H, intending to play 2♥ opposite 15-17 bal.
...P = 6 C, weak
...2♦ = 6 D, weak / 15-17 bal.
......2♥ = 5+ H, to play
...(...)
2♦/♥ = P/C, GF opposite 15+ bal.
(...)
3♣/♦/♥ = P/C, GF opposite 15+ bal.
(...)

[Zelandakh]

I think you are talking about Brown Sticker conventions rather than anything actually illegal here. The relevant paragraph runs:-

Quote

b) An overcall of a natural opening bid of one of a suit that does not promise at least four cards in a known suit.
EXCEPTION: A natural overcall in no trumps.
EXCEPTION: any cue bid suit that shows a strong hand.
EXCEPTION: a jump cue bid in opponent's known suit that asks partner to bid 3NT with a stopper in that suit.

As long as you stay within that you should be fine.

[mgoetze]

Pretty much the only advantage of the convention was that it was hard to defend against, and since you've removed that completely, what's the point? How is this better than any more normal scheme?

[nullve]

 mgoetze, on 2015-November-19, 07:23, said:

Pretty much the only advantage of the convention was that it was hard to defend against, and since you've removed that completely, what's the point? How is this better than any more normal scheme?

I've noticed the modern trend where two-level non-jump overcalls are made with significantly less than opening values, especially among pairs that play some form of Ghestem that prevents them from making a WJO. Maybe that style works well for them in practice (it did for Fantoni-Nunes, perhaps), but it seems that Good/Bad 1N aka Comic 1N would come in handy here*. Unfortunately, Comic 1N is now a brown sticker, hence the X/1N switch.

* Comic 1N/Ghestem were part of the same overcall scheme in Garozzo/Yallouze's book on the Blue Club, I think.

[gwnn]

I found this thread:
http://www.bridgebas...l-system-files/
In which paulg states that actually this 1NT is allowed in any WBF events, despite the fact that it fits the definition of a brown sticker convention. The link is unfortunately broken but maybe someone can find it somewhere else? http://www.ecatsbrid...tion%20Card.pdf

[nullve]

 gwnn, on 2015-November-19, 10:04, said:

I found this thread:
http://www.bridgebas...l-system-files/
In which paulg states that actually this 1NT is allowed in any WBF events, despite the fact that it fits the definition of a brown sticker convention.

Thanks. But from a more recent thread (http://www.bridgebas...c-1nt-overcall/):

 paulg, on 2015-January-04, 15:25, said:

Technically, according to the WBF and EBL System Policy, it is a Brown Sticker convention which would restrict its use in many jurisdictions. However, in the old WBF Convention Booklet it was noted that, despite technically being a Brown Sticker convention it was permitted in all WBF events. The WBF has not responded to my request about its current status.

[gwnn]

Ok so they have not replied, but does that mean that it's probably banned? I'd think that if they were to ban it, they'd find a better/clearer way than a non-reply to an enquiry.

Anyway, I'd hate to have to be required to always make takeout 1NT's on a known 4-card suit. Takeout doubles (or 1N's) are fun, I don't want to make them less frequent. What will I do on some boring hand like xx Axx KJxx KQxx from now on if I can't announce a boring hand without spade length? Wide-ranging overcalls on the 2 level have worked surprisingly well for me and apparently for other people too. Advancer just bids her hand and lets things go from there. I don't like this tradeoff at all.

[paulg]

 gwnn, on 2015-November-20, 00:21, said:

Ok so they have not replied, but does that mean that it's probably banned? I'd think that if they were to ban it, they'd find a better/clearer way than a non-reply to an enquiry.

I think your expectations are optimistic!

The WBF has still not replied and have not changed its System Policy, so it still refers to the WBF Convention Booklet which permits these conventions. The fact that this booklet is no longer published on the WBF site doesn't mean that people do not have a copy!

Things have changed in Europe. The EBL Systems Committee has updated its System Policy to remove the reference to this old booklet (indeed, about half the changes are from my recommendations, so some people do listen to me occasionally). So in EBL events the 1NT overcall is a Brown Sticker convention as it does not promise a known 4-card suit. There are no restrictions on the meanings of double, subject to full disclosure.

At least this is my understanding.

[gwnn]

Fair enough! I knew I shouldn't have applied any logic or expectations of reason to system regulations

[nullve]

 gwnn, on 2015-November-20, 00:21, said:

Anyway, I'd hate to have to be required to always make takeout 1NT's on a known 4-card suit. Takeout doubles (or 1N's) are fun, I don't want to make them less frequent. What will I do on some boring hand like xx Axx KJxx KQxx from now on if I can't announce a boring hand without spade length?

If the takeout 1N has to promise 4+ cards in a specified suit, that's a big turn-off for me as well, as I enjoy a loose takeout style at the 1-level.

Quote

Wide-ranging overcalls on the 2 level have worked surprisingly well for me and apparently for other people too.

I play wide-ranged 2-level non-jump overcalls, too, but they are still very old-fashioned in that they (in direct seat) require opening strength and at least a 6-card suit. Recently I've begun to suspect that this style is too passive, especially vulnerable(!) when it's less appealing to make a WJO on a 6-card suit.

[gwnn]

By wide-ranging 2-level non-jumps I meant also including something like xx xx Kxx AQxxxx as well (maybe also AQJxxx and out). It seems to work out OK. I mostly only play in clubs but I've seen vugraph people also do it on hands that are too weak for a WJO.

[nullve]

 gwnn, on 2015-November-20, 04:37, said:

By wide-ranging 2-level non-jumps I meant also including something like xx xx Kxx AQxxxx as well (maybe also AQJxxx and out). It seems to work out OK. I mostly only play in clubs but I've seen vugraph people also do it on hands that are too weak for a WJO.

Yes, that's what I thought you meant. I think e.g. Fantoni-Nunes played that way, but possibly because they also played Ghestem.

[gwnn]

 nullve, on 2015-November-20, 04:49, said:

Yes, that's what I thought you meant. I think e.g. Fantoni-Nunes played that way, but possibly because they also played Ghestem.

OK so you are not playing wide-ranging 2-level overcalls if you require opening strength. Anyway I think lots of top people play them too. Of course the lower range varies though.

[nullve]

 gwnn, on 2015-November-20, 08:01, said:

OK so you are not playing wide-ranging 2-level overcalls if you require opening strength.

They are only wide-ranging in the sense that they don't have a classical upper limit of 15-16 hcp.

[Zelandakh]

 nullve, on 2015-November-20, 08:16, said:

They are only wide-ranging in the sense that they don't have a classical upper limit of 15-16 hcp.

Do you know anyone at all above club level that uses an upper limit of 15 or 16 to 2 level overcalls?

[nullve]

 Zelandakh, on 2015-November-20, 17:34, said:

Do you know anyone at all above club level that uses an upper limit of 15 or 16 to 2 level overcalls?

Yes, I do. Do you disagree that the upper limit of pre-Kokish era standard 2-level non-jump overcalls was something like 15 or 16 hcp?

[Zelandakh]

I certainly remember seeing an upper limit of 16 mentioned in beginner's books from the 70s and early 80s. Not sure I can remember anything since and I think it is a very long time since this was standard at expert level. Not that the history really matters, I thought we were discussing a system for play in the 21st century.

[nullve]

 Zelandakh, on 2015-November-21, 05:13, said:

I thought we were discussing a system for play in the 21st century.

We were. I only mentioned the classical/pre-Kokish era upper limit because gwnn said my 2-level non-jump overcalls aren't really wide-ranging. If, for the sake of the discussion, I have to accept that in order to count as wide-ranging, the range for a 2-level non-jump overcall must be 7+ instead of 10+ (still no upper limit), I'm willing to do that.

[straube]

Arguably Portland Oregon's top pair uses a homegrown complicated relay system, but I've always been fascinated how they seem to land on their feet with their defensive methods. At the 1-level their overcalls are limited to about 15 hcps and when NV they have made some really crappy overcalls. Their jump overcalls are intermediate. Their double can be very offshape. Their 1N overcall shows a specific 5/5 hand! Personally I think sacrificing 1N for a specific 5/5 is madness, but they do very well on the whole. I think (when weak) advancer tends to stay out of doubler's way and doubler seems to take another bid most or all of the time.