BBO Discussion Forums: System Legality Question - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

System Legality Question

#21 User is offline   pran 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 5,344
  • Joined: 2009-September-14
  • Location:Ski, Norway

Posted 2016-August-08, 13:30

View PostZelandakh, on 2016-August-08, 13:14, said:

So Fantunes would be HUM if they chose to leave a hand type out of their 2 bids? And a pair playing Stone Age Precision (13-15 NT) that chose to devalue 4333 hands by 1hcp? Again, do you have any evidence to support that position other than the dodgy translation?

Standard rulings in Norwegian events.

We enforce very strictly that when a regulation specifies a particular HCP limit (e.g. "An opening bid at the one level is HUM if it can show or contain less than 8 HCP") this limit is absolute and not negotiable. A player will never be heard with an argument that the equivalent strength of the hand is more than 7 HCP.
0

#22 User is offline   Zelandakh 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,666
  • Joined: 2006-May-18
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 2016-August-08, 14:58

View Postpran, on 2016-August-08, 13:30, said:

Standard rulings in Norwegian events.

I understand that it is standard in Norway. We have just discussed how IB regulations vary from country to country and your opinion is that the interpretation used in Australia and New Zealand is against the Laws, let alone against WBF regulations. So why should we trust Norwegian regulation to be any more representative?
(-: Zel :-)

Happy New Year everyone!
0

#23 User is offline   pran 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 5,344
  • Joined: 2009-September-14
  • Location:Ski, Norway

Posted 2016-August-09, 02:43

View PostZelandakh, on 2016-August-08, 14:58, said:

I understand that it is standard in Norway. We have just discussed how IB regulations vary from country to country and your opinion is that the interpretation used in Australia and New Zealand is against the Laws, let alone against WBF regulations. So why should we trust Norwegian regulation to be any more representative?

How on earth do IB regulations have any relevance with the HCP limits in regulations on HUM? Did you notice the problem where passing instead of opening with 12 HCP apparently caused the system to be HUM? Our 13 HCP limit avoids that problem. (Such limits anyway are not a matter of law.)

And where have I implied that the Australian and New Zealand IB regulations are against the laws? As far as I can remember I have acknowledged the fact that such regulations allow a variety of leniency in judgements by the Directors.
0

#24 User is offline   mycroft 

  • Secretary Bird
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 7,059
  • Joined: 2003-July-12
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Calgary, D18; Chapala, D16

Posted 2016-August-16, 09:19

Interesting! I play a HUM, finally!

But seriously, my take on K/S is such that (very rare) 13s that can't be opened 1NT and don't have a safe rebid may have to be passed. Arguably, they're worth less than a K more than average (minors suck, especially both minors), and that's the argument I'd make if I used judgement to pass one.
When I go to sea, don't fear for me, Fear For The Storm -- Birdie and the Swansong (tSCoSI)
0

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users