[Phil]

I should know the answer to this, but I do not.

Can a club allow mid-chart conventions?

In a similar vein, can a club restrict psyches and regulate 1N openings so that they can apply a procedural penalty when one opens with a singleton.

There is a club around here that has implemented this policy. As a matter of fact, opening 1N with two doubletons is 'highly discouraged'

[hrothgar]

Club owners are given the opportunity to tithe to Memphis regardless of whether they happen to be running a bridge game.

The ACBL is happy to recognize master points granted by anyone willing to pay the appropriate sum...

[blackshoe]

A club can certainly allow Mid-Chart conventions. Technically, they cannot ban or restrict psyches of natural bids. As for opening 1NT with a singleton, unless the club has published a regulation banning such openings (this would, of course, be an amendment to the General Convention Chart, but clubs are permitted to do that) then it seems to me that a policy of automatic PPs for doing so is a bit much. OTOH, the ACBL lets clubs do pretty much whatever they damn well please, so long as the ACBL gets its money every month.

[TylerE]

For normal club games, they can do pretty much whatever. For sectionally rated games (e.g. STAC, possibly NAP and similar also), it is likely there may be a stated CoC from on high.

[blackshoe]

Yeah, I forgot about StaCs and such. Clubs have to allow the GCC as written for those (although I suppose some unit could set up CoCs which would allow the MidChart.

[peachy]

In ACBL, clubs have virtually unlimited right to regulate conventions and set other rules (whether strictly in accordance of the laws or not) as long as they are announced/posted on their bulletin board or some other way of letting the players know of the rules. Running a business that the customers want to visit, comes first.

[LH2650]

When a club applies for an ACBL sanction, it agrees to hold its games in strict accordance with the Laws of Duplicate Bridge and ACBL regulations. Psychic calls are governed by the Laws (the ACBL has an interpretation of this in the Club Director's Handbook), so the club can't do anything there. The ACBL has given clubs the right to regulate conventions, but opening 1 notrump with a singleton is not conventional, so the club is limited to the ACBL interpretation, which may be found in the Club Director's Handbook.

The Unit could put a stop to this, but there is no guarantee that it will act on a complaint.

[Phil]

LH2650, on Sep 28 2010, 10:24 AM, said:

The Unit could put a stop to this, but there is no guarantee that it will act on a complaint.

The Unit pretty much IS the club in this case, so I doubt there would be a change there.

I wonder if the District has any say in the matter?

[JoAnneM]

Districts have no say in how clubs or Units operate. The function of Districts is to run Regionals, NAOP finals, the GNT program, promote bridge through Education and an I/N program, conduct disciplinary events if necessary through its Recorder, Disciplinary and Ethics system, and usually produce some sort of newsletter or paper. Occasionally they may host an NABC.

There are some Districts that have modified these duties (for instance, Units may be responsible for Regionals, I am strongly opposed to that) but for the most part clubs report directly to ACBL, and through their District Director if a problem with ACBL.

[drankin]

Opening 1 NT with a singleton by agreement has been deemed a convention by the ACBL and that convention is barred at ACBL events. So if the club is following the GCC and that agreement exists, it is illegal and subject to PP.
(Barred unless it is forcing, as in the Romex system.)

[blackshoe]

There is a difference between opening 1NT with a singleton occasionally, and opening 1NT with a singleton by agreement. What is being discussed here, as I understand it, is a policy whereby any 1NT opening with a hand containing a singleton shall draw a procedural penalty. That is not in accordance with the General Convention Chart, or the laws of the game.

[Phil]

blackshoe, on Sep 28 2010, 11:16 PM, said:

There is a difference between opening 1NT with a singleton occasionally, and opening 1NT with a singleton by agreement. What is being discussed here, as I understand it, is a policy whereby any 1NT opening with a hand containing a singleton shall draw a procedural penalty. That is not in accordance with the General Convention Chart, or the laws of the game.

They don't distinguish between agreement and practice.

You do it and you are caught = PP.

[Elianna]

There's a club around here that does other things like forbidding preempts on less than 5 cards. They used to have a policy about opening 1NT with a singleton, but I don't remember if they still do. These policies were posted on the wall, but no mention of penalties was made.

Also, they used to have another policy that if you were a director and playing in the game, you couldn't call the director. This always seemed backwards to me (seemed to encourage people to make rulings at the table), but I think that the idea was that it was supposed to foster a friendly place, so as a director if someone led out of turn for example, you were supposed to just let them take it back. Again, the club has changed ownership since then, and I am no longer a director there, so I haven't been in the backroom and don't know if they still have that policy.

I do know that the club is doing something right, as they always have two sections in their afternoon games, whereas my club only consistently does that on one day.

[McBruce]

If a club's policy is illegal, complain to the ACBL. Let me give you one example of this actually working:

Our local club had a frequent TD caller. We're talking 5-8 calls per session, usually over hesitations that nobody else saw. Eventually a director hit upon the following solution, after three separate calls during the same auction. He told the frequent caller to, whenever he felt the TD should be called, ask his partner to call if he agreed, "because if I hear your voice again, I'm not coming."

Popular, effective, but illegal. The player at first tried grumbling to anyone he could find to listen, without much success (since most simply wanted him to stop calling when somebody took 0.3 exta seconds for a call), then told everyone he had quit playing at the club (nobody much cared), and finally complained in writing to the ACBL. The complaint got bounced around for several months, but eventually the club received a letter from the District Recorder, explaining why this policy was illegal and suggesting alternate solutions. The player was contacted and told that the policy was canceled, but that DPs would be swift and escalating should his behavior continue as before. It did not.

[wyman]

My club allows multi 2D, for better or for worse.

[Cascade]

wyman, on 2010-October-20, 11:22, said:

My club allows multi 2D, for better or for worse.

Welcome to the 20th century.

Are there any innovative plans for later this century?

[Cascade]

drankin, on 2010-September-28, 21:25, said:

Opening 1 NT with a singleton by agreement has been deemed a convention by the ACBL and that convention is barred at ACBL events.

Where exactly is that written in regulation?

As far as I can tell the ACBL has defined a "natural" 1NT. I have not seen 1NT with a singleton defined as a "convention". I don't believe that "convention" is the opposite of "natural".

[wyman]

Cascade, on 2010-October-20, 11:37, said:

Welcome to the 20th century.

Are there any innovative plans for later this century?

In the US, I thought that allowing Multi-2D was like uber-progressive. I was certainly shocked when it first was wheeled out on me...

[Siegmund]

My club used to have pretty much an "if you can explain it, you can play it" policy.

Nobody tried a multi here, but we've seen several other things: odd-even signaling throughout the hand; a 3S opening to show an unspecified minor preempt; a 2D opening that was "either Flannery or mini-Roman." One convoluted homegrown strong club system that I had to disallow because its practitioners couldn't properly explain it.

Eventually we changed, and became GCC only, because of all the dirty looks I got the month before our summer sectional when I had to go around and say "in the tournament that's not going to be allowed, better hurry and change it."

Re singletons and notrump, specifically: we've had several people who believed in opening all 15-17 count 4441s with 1NT, and at least one person who regularly responds 2NT(forcing) to 1m even with 6M322. Ignorance, not cleverness, in every case so far. We did force the worst offenders to alert their 1NT openings as "might have a singleton."

It never occurred to me, until these two recent threads, that somebody would try to ban it. pre-2007, as long as a notrump bid did not "convey a message other than" willingness to play in notrump, it was clearly not conventional and not subject to regulation, even if you chose to routinely offer to play in notrump with 4441. Once the distinction between conventions and more general partnership agreements was removed in 2007, a path appeared to regulate away the right to suggest notrump on any hand you wished to play in notrump.

[mdduke]

Cascade, on 2010-October-20, 11:39, said:

Where exactly is that written in regulation?

As far as I can tell the ACBL has defined a "natural" 1NT. I have not seen 1NT with a singleton defined as a "convention". I don't believe that "convention" is the opposite of "natural".

There are a few "natural conventions" like Reverses, but in general methods which are not natural are considered to be conventional.

The ACBL General Convention Chart is pretty unambiguous about defining what methods are allowed and disallowed, and provides several answers to the issues raised here:

• Clubs have full authority to regulate conventions in games conducted solely at their clubs.
  
• A no trump opening or overcall is natural if not unbalanced (generally, no singleton or void and only one or two doubletons).
  
• Unless specifically allowed, methods are disallowed

You are always allowed to play methods that are natural. The only non-natural notrump openings that are allowed (under the General Convention Chart) are:

• #2. FORCING 1NT OPENING BID (15+ HCPs) indicating a strong hand, balanced or unbalanced.
  
• #7. OPENING NOTRUMP BID AT THE TWO LEVEL OR HIGHER indicating at least 5-4 distribution in the minors.
  
• #8. OPENING THREE NOTRUMP BID indicating one of (1) a solid suit or (2) a minor one-suiter.

Note that the "forcing 1NT opening" is not a loophole that makes it legal to bid 1NT with 16-18 points and a singleton. You can't just decide that the 1NT opening is forcing and continue playing the standard "natural notrump" conventions like Stayman and Jacoby. You need a real bidding system where the opener is basically captain and the responder must bid with 0 points, such as the "dynamic 1NT" opening in the Romex system.

If a club tries to follow the same standards used in most other clubs and tournaments, consider the ACBL's page about opening 1NT with a singleton