Weak 2 with 4-card minor in new GCC

7 Pages
« First
←
4
5
6
7
→

You cannot start a new topic
You cannot reply to this topic

Weak 2 with 4-card minor in new GCC

#101 helene_t

The Abbess

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 17,101
Joined: 2004-April-22
Gender:Female
Location:UK

Posted 2014-March-14, 08:09

I am not sure if a 10-0-0-3 is a natural 1♣ opening in the ACBL. There are so many examples of definitions in the laws and regulations that are, according to most of the law experts here, not supposed to be taken litteraly. Probably MAF style and a Precision 1♦ that can be (14)35 are natural while Canape is not and Muiderberg is boarderline. Or something like that. In any case a 2♣ opening showing 3 clubs and 6+ in any non-club suit is not natural. Maybe if it shows 3+ clubs and 5- in the other suits it is ok.

The world would be such a happy place, if only everyone played Acol :) --- TramTicket

#102 Zelandakh

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 10,667
Joined: 2006-May-18
Gender:Not Telling

Posted 2014-March-14, 08:40

helene_t, on 2014-March-14, 08:09, said:

In any case a 2♣ opening showing 3 clubs and 6+ in any non-club suit is not natural.

Which part of the ACBL definition does it fail on? Whether you or I or any sane person would call it natural is irrelevant here.

(-: Zel :-)

#103 helene_t

The Abbess

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 17,101
Joined: 2004-April-22
Gender:Female
Location:UK

Posted 2014-March-14, 08:47

Well I don't read it anywhere, I just think that most ACBL authorities, if asked whether such a bid would be "natural", would say that the text between the lines says that playing natural methods you tend to bid the longer suit first, at least if there is great disparity in suit length. And then you can confuse them with reference to standard players responding 1M to a 1♦ opening holding a 4-card major and seven clubs and then the ping-pong game goes on ....

Basically you know a non-natural bid when you see it.

The world would be such a happy place, if only everyone played Acol :) --- TramTicket

#104 Zelandakh

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 10,667
Joined: 2006-May-18
Gender:Not Telling

Posted 2014-March-14, 08:51

I would ask them if opening 1♣ with a 4=4=3=2 hand is also natural given that this is bidding the shortest suit of the hand whereas in this example at least we are bidding the second longest. Not to mention where the alternative definition of natural that states that the relative suit lengths are relevant is hidden. Not that would get me anywhere of course - once someone over there has made their mind up it seems to be irrelevant whether it is correct or not. Instead you are just expected to play along and get a different ruling the following week when a different official is in charge.

(-: Zel :-)

#105 ArtK78

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 7,786
Joined: 2004-September-05
Gender:Male
Location:Galloway NJ USA
Interests:Bridge, Poker, participatory and spectator sports.
Occupation - Tax Attorney in Atlantic City, NJ.

Posted 2014-March-14, 08:53

This thread is the wrong place to try to argue rational thought processes.

#106 kenrexford

Brain Farts and Actual Farts Increasing with Age

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 9,586
Joined: 2005-September-21
Gender:Male
Location:Lima, Allen County, North-West-Central Ohio, USA
Interests:www.limadbc.blogspot.com editor/contributor

Posted 2014-March-14, 09:03

helene_t, on 2014-March-14, 08:47, said:

Obviously that's wrong. You are forgetting canapé. You would never open the longest suit first if the canapé was absolute. In fact, with absolute canapé, the structure must be like this:

1♠ = 4+ spades with a longer second suit, or 7+ spades with 0-3 hearts, 0-2 diamonds, and 0-1 clubs

1♥ = same as 1♠

1♦ = 3+ diamonds with a longer second suit, or 6+ diamonds with 0-3M and 0-1 clubs

1♣ = 2+ clubs with a longer second suit, or 5+ clubs with 0-3M and 0-2 diamonds

Thus, with the hand with 10♠/3♣, the absolute canapé system actually requires a 1♣ opening. And,. that's natural.

"Gibberish in, gibberish out. A trial judge, three sets of lawyers, and now three appellate judges cannot agree on what this law means. And we ask police officers, prosecutors, defense lawyers, and citizens to enforce or abide by it? The legislature continues to write unreadable statutes. Gibberish should not be enforced as law."

-P.J. Painter.

#107 fromageGB

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 2,679
Joined: 2008-April-06

Posted 2014-March-14, 09:51

kenrexford, on 2014-March-14, 09:03, said:

Thus, with the hand with 10♠/3♣, the absolute canapé system actually requires a 1♣ opening. And,. that's natural.

Aren't you a bit stuck for a bid playing canapé when you have 13 cards in the same suit?

#108 ArtK78

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 7,786
Joined: 2004-September-05
Gender:Male
Location:Galloway NJ USA
Interests:Bridge, Poker, participatory and spectator sports.
Occupation - Tax Attorney in Atlantic City, NJ.

Posted 2014-March-14, 10:01

fromageGB, on 2014-March-14, 09:51, said:

Aren't you a bit stuck for a bid playing canapé when you have 13 cards in the same suit?

You treat it as a 7-6 hand. It is just that both the 7 and the 6 are in the same suit.

#109 barmar

Group: Admin
Posts: 21,439
Joined: 2004-August-21
Gender:Male

Posted 2014-March-14, 10:04

Zelandakh, on 2014-March-14, 08:40, said:

Which part of the ACBL definition does it fail on? Whether you or I or any sane person would call it natural is irrelevant here.

Canape bidding may be natural according to the definition, but you're still required to pre-alert it. The Alert Procedures says

Quote

if you play a system that most players would not immediately recognize (such as a canapé system) or one the opponents may wish to discuss before the auction begins (a 10-12 1NT range with distributional requirements for minor-suit openings, for example), you are required to pre-Alert the opponents.

#110 Zelandakh

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 10,667
Joined: 2006-May-18
Gender:Not Telling

Posted 2014-March-14, 10:33

Which is the point that was being made Barry - it is possible to have bids that are both natural and conventional.

(-: Zel :-)

#111 Cascade

Group: Yellows
Posts: 6,761
Joined: 2003-July-22
Gender:Male
Location:New Zealand
Interests:Juggling, Unicycling

Posted 2014-March-14, 12:08

kenrexford, on 2014-March-14, 09:03, said:

Especially since it can only have only 19 hcp and therefore is too weak for a strong 2♣.

Wayne Burrows

I believe that the USA currently hold only the World Championship For People Who Still Bid Like Your Auntie Gladys - dburn
dunno how to play 4 card majors - JLOGIC
True but I know Standard American and what better reason could I have for playing Precision? - Hideous Hog
Bidding is an estimation of probabilities SJ Simon

#112 johnu

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 4,874
Joined: 2008-September-10
Gender:Male

Posted 2014-March-14, 13:37

Cascade, on 2014-March-14, 12:08, said:

Especially since it can only have only 19 hcp and therefore is too weak for a strong 2♣.

LOL, another "fuzzy" concept in the convention chart which requires a "strong" hand" to open an artificial 2♣ (or 3 suiter with 10+ HCP). What's "strong"? For a strong 1♣, it's 15+ HCP to use artificial and conventional bids afterwards. That doesn't seem to be the case for 2♣ where some players seem to get away with opening 2♣ with some like 8 solid cards in a major and nothing else, etc.

#113 ArtK78

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 7,786
Joined: 2004-September-05
Gender:Male
Location:Galloway NJ USA
Interests:Bridge, Poker, participatory and spectator sports.
Occupation - Tax Attorney in Atlantic City, NJ.

Posted 2014-March-14, 15:11

johnu, on 2014-March-14, 13:37, said:

If you routinely open a strong 2♣ with that sort of hand, you have to include it in your description of your 2♣ opener. Otherwise, you will have problems.

#114 johnu

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 4,874
Joined: 2008-September-10
Gender:Male

Posted 2014-March-14, 16:21

ArtK78, on 2014-March-14, 15:11, said:

If you routinely open a strong 2♣ with that sort of hand, you have to include it in your description of your 2♣ opener. Otherwise, you will have problems.

The question remains, what is strong for a 2♣ opening bid? If you play a strong 1♣, you need 15+ HCP. Someone can correct me, but looking at the GCC, having a agreement to open 1♣ with something like

AKJxxxxxx
xx
x
x

would mean you are playing a non-GCC convention, and you aren't allowed to psych an artificial opening bid.

Is there any logic to allowing a 2♣ opener to open this hand when a 1♣ opener can't.

#115 straube

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 4,073
Joined: 2009-January-18
Gender:Male
Location:Vancouver WA USA

Posted 2014-March-14, 17:00

johnu, on 2014-March-14, 16:21, said:

One club or one diamond may be used as all-purpose opening bids as long as they promise 10 hcps. I think you couldn't legally open AKJxxxxxx xx x x with 1C not because it isn't strong but because it doesn't have 10 hcps.

Many folks choose a 15+ artificial club (or diamond or heart) opening because that satisfies the requirement for them to use conventional responses; with fewer than 15 hcps all that they would be allowed is a conventional and forcing 1D response.

At the 2-level they allow for "strength-showing" bids but don't specify 15 hcps. As a strong club player I've considered whether that's fair, but it is at the 2-level and folks do need to be able to force one way or the other when they have game or near game in their own hand.

#116 johnu

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 4,874
Joined: 2008-September-10
Gender:Male

Posted 2014-March-14, 17:34

straube, on 2014-March-14, 17:00, said:

At the 2-level they allow for "strength-showing" bids but don't specify 15 hcps. As a strong club player I've considered whether that's fair, but it is at the 2-level and folks do need to be able to force one way or the other when they have game or near game in their own hand.

I think most people would open with 4M or a namyats bid with 8+ tricks in their suit as in this example.

#117 straube

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 4,073
Joined: 2009-January-18
Gender:Male
Location:Vancouver WA USA

Posted 2014-March-14, 17:41

johnu, on 2014-March-14, 17:34, said:

I think most people would open with 4M or a namyats bid with 8+ tricks in their suit as in this example.

I agree. I think we're just talking about what is legally possible or not possible.

#118 Zelandakh

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 10,667
Joined: 2006-May-18
Gender:Not Telling

Posted 2014-March-15, 16:02

johnu, on 2014-March-14, 16:21, said:

The question remains, what is strong for a 2♣ opening bid?

As Ed is fond of pointing out, in the ACBL "strong" means whatever the pair using the term want it to mean. :blink:

(-: Zel :-)

#119 Cascade

Group: Yellows
Posts: 6,761
Joined: 2003-July-22
Gender:Male
Location:New Zealand
Interests:Juggling, Unicycling

Posted 2014-March-15, 17:25

Zelandakh, on 2014-March-15, 16:02, said:

As Ed is fond of pointing out, in the ACBL "strong" means whatever the pair using the term want it to mean. :blink:

Nevertheless as Art pointed out they still have a disclosure responsibility. I think "strong" or even "gameforce" etc will not be sufficient. As a minimum I would expect the players to make clear their bid may be based on very light high card strength with lots of playing strength. This is unexpected information compared with a more standard style where players preempt with such hands.

#120 steve2005

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 3,150
Joined: 2010-April-22
Gender:Male
Location:Hamilton, Canada
Interests:Bridge duh!

Posted 2014-March-31, 10:11

To get back on topic

If I have 5♠ 4♣ 6 hcp with most if not all my hcp in your two long suit Vul at imps

I really don't want to bid 2♠ on this hand playing pre-empts with 4 card minors even with 6♠ would hesitate but do it.

This would be a much more useful convention if you are allowed to have a 5-card minor or even to specify that you must have a 5-card minor

5-5 in the blacks I would be much more willing to bid 2♠ at any vul

Sarcasm is a state of mind

7 Pages
« First
←
4
5
6
7
→

You cannot start a new topic
You cannot reply to this topic

BBO Discussion Forums: Weak 2 with 4-card minor in new GCC - BBO Discussion Forums

Weak 2 with 4-card minor in new GCC

#101 helene_t

#102 Zelandakh

#103 helene_t

#104 Zelandakh

#105 ArtK78

#106 kenrexford

#107 fromageGB

#108 ArtK78

#109 barmar

#110 Zelandakh

#111 Cascade

#112 johnu

#113 ArtK78

#114 johnu

#115 straube

#116 johnu

#117 straube

#118 Zelandakh

#119 Cascade

#120 steve2005

2 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users

Delete Post

Skin and Language

Execution Stats

BBO Discussion Forums: Weak 2 with 4-card minor in new GCC - BBO Discussion Forums

Weak 2 with 4-card minor in new GCC

2 User(s) are reading this topic 0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users

Delete Post

Skin and Language

Execution Stats

2 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users