|
Thread Index :: FAQ's :: Main Menu :: Posting Hints :: Emoticon Key :: Search David's Lawspage :: EBU :: ACBL :: WBF |
International Bridge Laws ForumIf you need help with the Laws or rulings from |
| To ask a question, click HERE and type in your message. Please specify your country in your query where indicated. Right click your mouse button for help on abbreviations. |
| Welcome, Register :: Log in |
| View Thread Page(s): [ 1 ] |
| [ Get Email Advice of Replies ] | [ Print ] | [ Send ] | [ Watch ] | [ < ] [ Add a Reply ] [ > ] |
NeilThomson  6 posts bridgetalk member  Reply |
Country: Scotland
After a natural 1 NT opening, is it possible for the opponents to use following method 2C described as black suits, but subsequently to rebid C's shows only C's? 2D red suits, but to rebid D's shows only D's 2H shows majors, but to rebid H's only H's If not allowed (reason being incomplete explanation), would it be permissible to explain 2C's as "either blacks or only C's" 2D's as "either reds or only D's" 2H's as "either majors or only H's" |
bluejak  426 posts Forum Host Reply |
At Level 3, the normal level for clubs and events, all of these methods are permitted in Scotalnd, and the description you mention is perfect.
|
|
NeilThomson 6 posts bridgetalk member Reply |
Country: Scotland
Is this the case south of the border (in England) as well? |
|
NeilThomson 6 posts bridgetalk member Reply |
Also I slightly different scenario
Overcall of 2C's, alerted and described as H's and another and then the repeat of the orginal suit as meaning single suiter of the bid suit. In this case the "anchor or known suit" is not known when the first overcall is made does this make a difference? |
|
bluejak 426 posts Forum Host Reply |
The system outlined originally may be played in England or Wales at Level 2, and in Scotland at Level 3.
2  as  + other, or as , may only be played at Level 4, in England, Wales, or Scotland.
|
|
Earl_Purple 79 posts bridgetalk member  Reply |
But here one of the suits is known, i.e. the suit that was overcalled.
In the old EBU levels, at "restricted" license level any defence to 1NT was permitted, and I assume that is what level 3 is. But there is a big difference of a 2 overcall being either "hearts and another" or "clubs" because in that case you don't know any of his suits. But with it being blacks or clubs, you know he has clubs, just that he may have spades as well. |
|
bluejak 426 posts Forum Host Reply |
Restricted licence became Level 4 not Level 3.
|
|
acoales 1 posts bridgetalk member Reply |
Country: England
Please comment on the following Bidding Dequence and claim. All Vul, N dealer. N E S W 1NT, pass, pass, 2C(note) pass, 2H, pass, 3C pass, pass, pass note: EW did not have completed convention cards (as is common at our club) but 2C bid was alerted and the explanation given by E was that it was Pinpoint Astro showing two suiter - Clubs and Hearts. W actually held a long clubs and short hearts. Played in 3C nine tricks were made. NS contend that this is not an acceptable bidding sequence - See EBU Orange Book 12.13.1 (b) - which says --- quote You may use 2-level bids [over 1NT] .... to show any one of (i) a single specified suit (ii) two suits at least 4-4, of which at least one is specified (iii) three suits, at least 4-4-3-2, of which at least one is specified Note: players often abuse this by bidding, say, 2C to show Hearts and another suit and then rebidding 3C to show just clubs: this is not allowed. --- end quote NS suggest redress awarding an adjusted score either of two ways: 1) Bid of 1NT should stand where 8 tricks made is most likely outcome. - award adjusted score of 120 to NS or 2) Final pass by E who holds stronger Hearts than Clubs is not acceptable - bidding should continue to at least 4C. |
|
Ed 172 posts Forum Host Reply |
First, IMO, players who call the TD should recite the facts, not try to tell the TD how to rule.  Second, based on the laws and the regulation cited, it appears that NS were misinformed by the explanation of the 2C overcall. That is a violation of Law 75. Now, Law 21 deals with changes of calls that were made based on misinformation. Under that law, South may change his final pass to some other call. If he does not wish to do so, the hand will be played in 3C, as it was. Law 40C then permits (but does not require) the TD to award an adjusted score, if he feels the NOS were damaged. However, Third, it appears that NS did not call the TD until they discovered their bad result. This does not sit well. Are they trying for a double shot? I don't know. I have questions I would like to ask of the players at the table. Based on those answers, I might award an assigned adjusted score (probably 1NT by N making 2, based on the information at hand) or I might rule result stands. I might, but probably would not (but I am not an EBU TD - there may be requirements or precedent of which I'm unaware), award a penalty to EW for using an illegal convention (if I decide they are). If they are using an illegal convention, I would certainly tell them to stop. And if it looks to me, in the end, like NS were trying for a double shot, I'm disinclined to let them have it. |
|
bluejak 426 posts Forum Host Reply |
This is very complicated because there are so many different factors but I shall try to list them all!
 When reading the Orange book, especially the part about permitted conventions, you always have to remember that certain extra items are permitted each year. These are published in English Bridge, there is a supplement available from Aylesbury, and for the last two years they have appeared in the Tournament Committee Year book. You will find that the permitted defences to 1NT have been extended at Level 2 and 3 so that a pair may play anything if it guarantees one suit. Thus it is now permitted to play 2 over 1NT as either + or just even at Levels 2 and 3.While they were not playing an illegal convention it is worth noting that if they had been there is an English regulation that the board is cancelled, and Average Plus given to the other side, and Average Minus to the offending side, unless the other side had already done better than that. So the suggested adjustment would have been wrong even before 2001 when this conveniton became legal. It is very important that players describe their system correctly. If they play it as either + or just then they should say so, and that is not Pinpoint Astro. They must never describe it as Pinpoint Astro nor must they put Pinpoint Astro on any convention card.It appears that N/S were misinformed. But were they damaged? Unless they can show that they might have bid differently - perhaps they had a heart fit? As to not calling the TD until they discovered the result this is perfectly normal. There is nothing wrong with the double shot in 99% of cases. It is not illegal. The only thing that is frowned on is if a pair took a wild or gambling action because they felt they would get a ruling anyway if it failed, and there is no evidence of that here.
|
| View Thread Page(s): [ 1 ] |
| [ Get Email Advice of Replies ] | [ Print ] | [ Send ] | [ Watch ] | [ < ] [ Add a Reply ] [ > ] |
|
7 bridge player(s) online in the last 15 minutes - 1 bridgetalk member(s), 0 incognito and 6 guest(s). (The most ever was 52 09:45:43 Fri Feb 14 2003) bluejak |
|
Total Members: 393, Newest Member: edm. | Register :: Log in The time is now 00:18:23 Wed Aug 27 2003 |
© 2001-2003 BbBoy.net
|
Thread Index :: FAQ's :: Main Menu :: Posting Hints :: Emoticon Key :: Search David's Lawspage :: EBU :: ACBL :: WBF |
Legend :: 
Read Topic :: 
Unread Topic
Read Topic :: Unread Topic
Help | Full Format: ON :: OFF | Text: ON :: OFF | Email Status