|
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 ] [ > ] |
pbleighton  103 posts bridgetalk member  Reply |
Country: US
I've started a couple of threads which relate to this, but I wanted to focus on this system, specifically the 1H/1S/2C/2D opening bids, which show 8-11 hcp. They don't conform to the Rule of 18, but a reply to a previous post said the Rule of 18 didn't apply in the U.S. I assume that means that these opening bids are GCC legal. If so, are they legal in most of the world, for regular events (GCC equivalent)? The answer to another thread confirmed my suspicion that non-game forcing transfer responses to a one level suit bid aren't GCC legal. I am considering using 1NT forcing as either weak or game forcing. Weak responders would pass a rebid by opener, and with a suit switch would either pass or prefer back to the first suit. Any other responder's rebid would be forcing to game. 2/1 responses would then be non-forcing, showing weak or invitational values. Would this change bring the responses into GCC conformity (I think they do)? If so, would permitting a 2/1 reponse with a yarborough as well as up to 15 hcp be OK (bundling in WJS)? Magic Diamond uses 2H/2S openers with possible unknown suits. I realize this could be a complex subject, but is there a summary somewhere of what weak two openings are GCC legal, which are Midchart, and which are neither? If you are familiar with Magic Diamond, is there anything else about it which has GCC problems? Is there any other very light opening system you are aware of which is mostly or entirely GCC legal? |
bluejak  427 posts Forum Host Reply |
I shall leave Jim, Ed, and my other North American friends to answer the main part of your query. However, you also ask
This is a pretty unanswerable question. There are millions of sponsoring organisations. Ok, I expect most of them follow what their national organisations say, in fact in many cases they have to, but even so there are many many national organisations, probably in their hundreds. Perhaps someone would like to go to NCBOs and ZOs and count them! In England and Wales you are limited to at least 18 Opening Points {"Rule of 18"} in top competitions, and at least 19 OPs in other ones.
|
|
ne_trepide Reply |
on the subject of opening points i include an extract from "the director's corner" covering the matter as it applies in australia.
this may not be relevant but is perhaps of some interest/ |
|
olddude909 65 posts bridgetalk member  Reply |
Country: usa
In ACBL land, if memory serves correctly, natural 1 level opening bids must show at least 8 hcps in order to be GCC legal. I know that I've played against "mini-precision" systems where the 1c opener showed 13+, and all other openers shows 8-12 (1d/1h/1s), 10-12 (1nt), or 6-12 (2c/2d/2h/2s). One partner and I developed a system we called Pagan Diamond, which is completely GCC legal: 1c=13-16, any 1d=17+, any 1h/s=8-12, 4-5 long, no 6+ suit anywhere in hand 1nt=10-12 (my partner held out for 12-15, and we never really resolved this issue) 2x=6-12, 6+ long, otherwise undisciplined 2nt=8-12, 5-5 minors we found that this system (1) was VERY effective in terms of the opening 2bids; (2) was pretty effective in terms of the 1M opening bids; (3) lost against par when we were forced to open light 1bids as 2bids (eg ajxx; x; ajtxxx; xx) because the distributional nature of the hand precluded a comfortable 1c opening bid sequence); (4) lost moderately against par when opening 1c because handling interference was more difficult; (5) lost moderately against par because of the excess space used by the strong 1d opening bid. henrys |
|
pbleighton 103 posts bridgetalk member Reply |
Country: US
"One partner and I developed a system we called Pagan Diamond" Did you open 1M with 4M and 5m? Did you open 2m or 2M with a 4 card major side suit? How did you handle the bidding after 1M with weak hands and 4 card majors? I have gone round and round on this. Specifically, what did you do with sub-invitational responses (the big majority of the responses) with singleton support and 6+ side suit, without messing up your stronger responses? |
|
olddude909 65 posts bridgetalk member Reply |
Country: us
to answer your questions: (1) 4M-5m hands were opened 1M. The only hands in the 8-12 range that were passed were (a) 8-9 flat and (b) quasi minor two suiters 5431/5422. (2) responses were mostly normal except that we used a lot of fit jumps. we defined a gf hand as 16+ hcps, a gi hand as 13-15, and a part score hand as 0-12. so 1nt showed 0-12 (roughly), and 2/1s shows 13+ with rebids much like old fashioned standard american. one plus of using 10-12 1nts is that the 2nt rebid could be used artificially to accept the invitation. i would have prefered to use a relay with transfers structure, but that wasn't legal. (3) weak misfitting 1suiters bid 1nt. sometimes it worked, sometimes it didn't (shrug). we found that we had to accept certain losses as a consequence of the very weak 1M opening bids. |
|
JimO 175 posts Forum Host Reply |
Country: USA
One level opening bids with as few as 8 hcp are GCC legal, but must be pre-alerted. Transfer responses would be allowed on the Mid-Chart (all calls which promise 4+ cards in a known suit).
|
|
olddude909 65 posts bridgetalk member Reply |
Country: USA
Whoops! Maybe I should resurrect pagan diamond then rofl. HenryS |
|
rabbit Reply |
I think those 8-11 openings 1SH/2CD are ok almost everywhere.
And there is a "non-brown sticker" modification in 2H/S openings for system restricted tournaments. Modified opening shows the bid suit + an unknown minor. |
|
pbleighton 103 posts bridgetalk member Reply |
"And there is a "non-brown sticker" modification in 2H/S openings for system restricted tournaments. Modified opening shows the bid suit + an unknown minor."
I have seen this - in the U.S. - is this Midchart? |
|
Earl_Purple 79 posts bridgetalk member Reply |
If they're not legal, my own strong diamond system is, I think, legal in most organisations because they use regular strength 1H and 1S bids and the weak distributional hands are all opened at the 2-level.
The system is somewhere on BridgeTalk forums, in the general section, last posted sometime around 29 July I think. |
|
bluejak 427 posts Forum Host Reply |
Every country has its own regulations, and it is very dangerous to say
They are certainly not ok in England or Wales, for example, and there are many other places where they are not ok. Anyone who wishes to play non-mainstream systems should always check with their own national authority. Alternatively, if you ask here and say what your country is we shall find out for you.
|
| View Thread Page(s): [ 1 ] |
| [ Get Email Advice of Replies ] | [ Print ] | [ Send ] | [ Watch ] | [ < ] [ Add a Reply ] [ > ] |
|
6 bridge player(s) online in the last 15 minutes - 1 bridgetalk member(s), 0 incognito and 5 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 00:30:48 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