[Free]

Suppose you make an agreement that in 3rd seat, you open 2♦, 2♥ and 2♠ as singlesuiter (6+ cards in the suit) with either 11-16HCP or 0-6HCP. Partner would've opened light in 1st seat, so he won't jump to game very fast. He can relay with 2NT, and responses are like Ogust. 3♣ shows minimum and poor suit, but the 0-6HCP version can be placed over there as well without much difference for responder since he will usually signoff at 3-level when he gets this response.

So:
2♦/♥/♠ = 6+ card suit, 11-16 or 0-6HCP

Responses after 2♦/♥/♠ - 2NT:
3♣ = 11-14, poor suit OR 0-6 (no way to find out which it is exactly)
3♦ = 11-14, good suit
3♥ = 14-16, poor suit
3♠ = 14-16, good suit
3NT = 14-16, solid suit

Is this a legal agreement? Or is it considered a controlled psych?

[Gerben42]

Legal agreement. It's not a psyche because you explain the both options. What would be a controlled psyche is when you say it's 11 - 16 but have a way to find out that it isn't, which would be, well, cheating, in my opinion.

[tysen2k]

In the ACBL (not sure about other regions) it's a legal definition, but you are forbidden to use any conventions after it. This prohibition kicks in if your range of strength is more than 7 HCP.

[Blofeld]

It's not clear to me what "convention" means in that context, tysen. Must all bids be to play (or suggestions to play)? Or are you allowed (natural) forcing bids?

And although you'll never be looking to go slamming after this 3rd seat opening, if you had a similar agreement in 1st/2nd, would you be allowed to naturally bid to show strength/controls?

[FrancesHinden]

It's currently not allowed under English licensing rules.
(the draft for the new rules from next year - which I happen to have in front of me- says

"...the range of defined values may differ in different positions and/or at different vulnerabilities, but only one range is allowed at any combination of position and vulnerability"

mind you, it's arguable that they can't actually put this restriction onto a 2-level opening such as this because it's a natural call: shows length in the suit bid. I may investigate further...

[tysen2k]

Blofeld, on Oct 21 2005, 08:35 AM, said:

It's not clear to me what "convention" means in that context, tysen. Must all bids be to play (or suggestions to play)? Or are you allowed (natural) forcing bids?

And although you'll never be looking to go slamming after this 3rd seat opening, if you had a similar agreement in 1st/2nd, would you be allowed to naturally bid to show strength/controls?

You are free to state that a bid is forcing or not forcing as long as it's natural. It doesn't have to be to play. But no asking bids, relays, fit-showing jumps (even though it's natural it conveys an additional meaning), splinters, etc. It also doesn't matter if the opps come in, the partnership is forbidden for the rest of the auction. So all doubles are penalty, etc.

[david_c]

FrancesHinden, on Oct 21 2005, 06:39 PM, said:

It's currently not allowed under English licensing rules.

It's not? At level 2 we're allowed "Any hand that contains at least four cards in the suit bid", without any further restrictions. It seems to me that the restriction "only one range is allowed" only applies to the multi-type bids at L3/4.

[pigpenz]

i dont think you would be able to have a parntership understand on this in the acbl i believe they use the 5-5 rule, 5hcp and 5 card suit. You are allowed to deviate once in awhile but cant have partnership understand on this.

Barry Crane at matchpoints used to open 4card suits regularly as weak twos in 3rd seat.

[Elianna]

pigpenz, on Oct 21 2005, 11:11 AM, said:

i believe they use the 5-5 rule, 5hcp and 5 card suit.

No longer true (in fact, I'm told that this rule was eliminated before I was born, but that's prolly an exageration). You still must promise at least 5 cards, and have a range of 7 points to be allowed to play conventional calls over them.

[han]

Elianna, does this 7-pt rule also hold for 3rd seat preempts?

If so, I don't know any pairs that do not violate this rule regularly (i.e. both have a larger expected range and use conventional responses).

BTW, what does it mean for a call to be conventional? Is the following conventional?

p-p-2S-(4C*)
4D**

*= 5-5 in clubs and hearts.
**= asks for diamond lead against a possible heart contract.

I expect any expert to play this without agreement, but it is still (somewhat) artificial.

[awm]

I suspect that Hannie's example of 3rd seat preempts falls under the following set of ACBL rules (which were clarified to me recently via email from acbl headquarters):

1. Basically anything goes in 3rd seat; wide-ranging preempts, opening at the one-level with less than 8 hcp by agreement, etc. are all okay. Also, such agreements about 3rd seat openings require neither an alert nor a pre-alert.

2. Taking similar actions in 1st/2nd seat would not be permissable.

3. The rules regarding 1st seat openings/responses and 3rd seat openings/responses are identical.

I understand if this is confusing to you, because (obviously) it is not logically consistent. However, ACBL does not feel that it is important that their rules be logically consistent, since such a set of rules would not allow sufficient discretion to directors and/or committees to rule as they think is appropriate (i.e. base their ruling on the situation and the players involved).

[han]

It all made sense until I got to rule number 3....

So rule 1 suggests that Free's convention is fine and artificial responses are allowed (I still don't understand conventional. Does it mean that you are not allowed to have agreements over wide ranging preempts? That can't be true)

And rule 3 suggests basically the opposite.

I understand that this gives directors some freedom, but how are we players able to determine whether we are allowed to play a certain convention? Should we ask the director before the start of each event?

Luckily Free doesn't have these problems.

[tysen2k]

awm, on Oct 21 2005, 11:35 AM, said:

I suspect that Hannie's example of 3rd seat preempts falls under the following set of ACBL rules (which were clarified to me recently via email from acbl headquarters):

1. Basically anything goes in 3rd seat; wide-ranging preempts, opening at the one-level with less than 8 hcp by agreement, etc. are all okay. Also, such agreements about 3rd seat openings require neither an alert nor a pre-alert.

Really? Can you forward me that email so I can print it out as proof?

One of my favorite toys is a 3rd seat 8-15 1NT. Since I open light, we pretty much give up on game. We currently play that 2x responses are to play and can't use any conventions over it. But are you saying that I can use conventions? Take-out doubles would be nice.

Tysen

[Free]

We don't have a lot of restrictions around here (Belgium). Only HUM and Brown Sticker Conventions are banned at most tournaments, but any red system is allowed almost everywhere (except in low competition and beginner tournaments). So no silly rules about specific openings, preempts with a range bigger than X hcp,... The only 'stupid' rule we have here is 'rule of 18' to determine a minimum opening bid at 1-level. But I can live with that.

So I guess I can play this over here Tnx all for the responses!