[sfi]

barmar, on 2021-October-04, 10:48, said:

It's a chicken-and-egg problem.

But clubs aren't required to follow ACBL's restrictions, they can be more liberal, and many clubs are. And higher-level tournaments use the less restrictive convention charts.

I agree about the problem. I do think the general approach followed by the ACBL - of selectively allowing agreements - is fundamentally flawed and detrimental to the game. So I'm definitely on the side of the chicken. Or the egg, depending on how the analogy works here.

It's good to hear that many clubs are more liberal than published regulations, and I haven't paid much attention to the regs that came out a year or two ago. So it might have improved significantly.

[sfi]

mycroft, on 2021-October-04, 10:28, said:

I play a system that's totally Natural (no forcing or artificial openings, fewer artificial responses than "standard", ...) that until recently was considered "YELLOW" by Australian regulators - as dangerous and scary as Forcing Pass. They've changed it now - a couple of years before the ACBL changed to allow Transfer responses to 1♣.

I'd be surprised if this were true. The only thing I'm aware of that would make a natural system yellow would be super light openings. And that hasn't changed for quite a while. What about your system was considered yellow?

[mycroft]

Yep, 2 level openers < Ro15.

And the Open chart really has liberalized bridge far beyond where I thought they would go for anything that wasn't restricted like the Mid-Chart was (effectively, "If you're not a pro, good luck finding a Mid-Chart game you can play in often enough to be worth learning a Mid-Chart *system* (as opposed to bolt-on preempts)"). Even the Open+ chart is more available than old Mid-Chart games were.

The big keys were:

• moving from allowing bids to disallowing bids.
  
• removing effectively all restrictions starting with responder (which is something pretty much everywhere else was doing for years).

Because of the requirements (now, consistent across the ACBL rather than up to the unit or district to decide) that mean that "most" tournament players will be playing Open chart at least some of the time, most clubs I've heard about have decided to take the ACBL's suggestion and make their non-limited games Open Chart.

[sfi]

Fair enough. I didn't realise they had restrictions on two-level openings, but I'm happy to believe it.

Good to hear about the changes in the ACBL. I look forward to seeing it in action if/when I get back there.