[awm]

What are the rules in your SO regarding 3rd seat openings?

As I understand it, most places have a rule on the books that you can't agree to open hands which are a king or more below average strength at the one-level. Does this rule apply to 3rd seat opening agreements? If not, what, if any, restriction is there on 3rd seat openings at the one-level?

I'd also assume that in most places methods where you frequently open at the one-level on the equivalent of balanced 8-counts require an alert or pre-alert or something. Does this apply if you open such hands (or even lighter) in 3rd chair? Or is this "just bridge"?

I know (more or less) what the ACBL rule (or non-rule) about this is, I'm more curious what the regulations are elsewhere.

[gwnn]

in Romania it is strictly forbidden to open weaker hands than 10hcp (as part of a system. otherwise of course you can psyche anything but a strong 1 or 2♣ opener) or the ones that dont satisfy the rule of 18. this is a bit ambiguous (can one still open a 10 hcp 4333 hand systemically?) but in any case it's a guideline. the rule doesn't treat seats differently.

There are no exceptions for certain events. in Romania all tourneys are equal (at least as an alerting procedure), regional or national, teams or pairs.

[BillHiggin]

The laws do NOT grant any rights to regulate natural bids to sponsoring organizations (the right to regulate conventions is so granted).

The only thing sponsoring organizations can do to restrict natural bids is to regulate conventions used with them. This can be seen in the language the ACBL uses with regard to wide range 1N openings or weak 2 bids in the GCC. Sponsoring organizations do have the right to regulate (forbid) conventional responses which are designed to check for such light openings (where the ACBL specifically excludes Drury from such restrictions).

[david_c]

Here in England, this is one of the things where persistent complaints from players led to the rules being changed.

The new rule (in the vast majority of competitions, at least) is 8+ HCP.

[Free]

In Belgium it depends on the level of play. Most of the time, "rule of 18" must be respected. In higher competitions we can open on anything, but the distance from the rule of 18 will depend whether your call will be considered a psych or not.

[mycroft]

BillHiggin, on Apr 30 2007, 12:04 PM, said:

The laws do NOT grant any rights to regulate natural bids to sponsoring organizations (the right to regulate conventions is so granted).

Not technically correct:

Law 40D [sentence about convention regulation skipped]:
"Zonal organizations may, in addition, regulate partnership understandings (even if not conventional) that permit the partnership's initial actions at the one level to be made with a hand of a king or more below average strength. Zonal organizations may delegate this responsibility."

Most ZOs, strangely enough, have. Their idea of "a king or more below average strength" varies - which I believe is the question being asked.

In addition, Sponsoring Organizations have, as has been said above, carte blanche on regulating conventions, and that includes banning them after bids they don't like, natural or no, and banning the use of them if they are ever psyched. In fact, they can say "you're playing Moldavian Standard, with all the bells and whistles in the book, or you may not play any conventions whatsoever" - I explicitly asked and got an affirmative answer from an official in the WBFLC (although he said it would be a stupid thing to do, which it would, of course, except that it's been tried at least twice that I know of).

Michael.

[skjaeran]

mycroft, on May 1 2007, 01:32 AM, said:

BillHiggin, on Apr 30 2007, 12:04 PM, said:

The laws do NOT grant any rights to regulate natural bids to sponsoring organizations (the right to regulate conventions is so granted).

Not technically correct:

Law 40D [sentence about convention regulation skipped]:
"Zonal organizations may, in addition, regulate partnership understandings (even if not conventional) that permit the partnership's initial actions at the one level to be made with a hand of a king or more below average strength. Zonal organizations may delegate this responsibility."

Most ZOs, strangely enough, have. Their idea of "a king or more below average strength" varies - which I believe is the question being asked.

In addition, Sponsoring Organizations have, as has been said above, carte blanche on regulating conventions, and that includes banning them after bids they don't like, natural or no, and banning the use of them if they are ever psyched. In fact, they can say "you're playing Moldavian Standard, with all the bells and whistles in the book, or you may not play any conventions whatsoever" - I explicitly asked and got an affirmative answer from an official in the WBFLC (although he said it would be a stupid thing to do, which it would, of course, except that it's been tried at least twice that I know of).

Michael.

That's absolutely correct, Michael.

In Norway, our LC has done so. 1-level opening bids with less than 8 hcp makes the system fall into the HUM classification, and thus be prohibited in most events.

[awm]

The ACBL position on this seems to be kind of fuzzy. In 1st/2nd seat the rule is that you can't agree to open (at the one-level) hands with less than 8 hcp. This is usually interpreted pretty strictly, so an agreement to open:

KJxx
KJx
xxx
xxx

is perfectly okay, but an agreement to open:

AKxxxx
xxxxx
x
x

is not allowed. Basically if you ever open on less than 8 hcp in 1st/2nd seat (at the one-level) you have to either convince the director this was a psych (so it's nowhere near the expected hand for an opening) or have the board adjusted.

There are also rules about disclosure. If you agree to open very light in 1st/2nd seat (which basically means you open less than ten-point hands with any degree of frequency) then you are supposed to pre-alert and also alert during the auction. Usually you can get away with doing only one of these two, but will get in trouble if you don't do either.

Officially the rules about legality and disclosure for 3rd/4th seat openings aren't any different. But the "rules on the ground" are actually quite different. I know one pair that opens on the "rule of 17" in 3rd/4th and this has been ruled okay. Another pair seems to have agreed to open all hands in 3rd seat and directors are unsure whether this is okay. Certainly I have never heard any pair disclose opening light in 3rd seat, even though many pairs are opening hands like the two examples, and I've never heard of anyone getting anywhere with directors protesting a non-alert of light 3rd seat openings since it's "just bridge."

[cherdano]

awm, on May 1 2007, 05:27 PM, said:

The ACBL position on this seems to be kind of fuzzy. In 1st/2nd seat the rule is that you can't agree to open (at the one-level) hands with less than 8 hcp. This is usually interpreted pretty strictly, so an agreement to open:

KJxx
KJx
xxx
xxx

is perfectly okay,
[...]

Certainly I have never heard any pair disclose opening light in 3rd seat, even though many pairs are opening hands like the two examples, and I've never heard of anyone getting anywhere with directors protesting a non-alert of light 3rd seat openings since it's "just bridge."

It's just....bad bridge?

[rbforster]

Cherdano, I think you quoted the wrong part of Adam's reply . See below...

cherdano, on May 1 2007, 06:44 PM, said:

awm, on May 1 2007, 05:27 PM, said:

Another pair seems to have agreed to open all hands in 3rd seat and directors are unsure whether this is okay...  I've never heard of anyone getting anywhere protesting a non-alert of light 3rd seat openings since it's "just bridge."

It's just....bad bridge?

Wow, every hand in 3rd seat - does that make it a forcing pass system? Here I thought I was a little nuts advocating all 8 counts/Rule of 15. Against those methods, I'd be tempted to trap pass with a strong NT now and then, just to see what happens.

[awm]

Rob F, on May 1 2007, 06:59 PM, said:

Wow, every hand in 3rd seat - does that make it a forcing pass system? Here I thought I was a little nuts advocating all 8 counts/Rule of 15. Against those methods, I'd be tempted to trap pass with a strong NT now and then, just to see what happens.

It's a tempting idea, but keep in mind that this pair doesn't (and apparently doesn't have to) pre-alert or in any other way disclose their methods. So it might be tough to work out what they're really playing, and if you start asking too many questions they might change their minds.

As far as I know their official agreement is "we only pass in 3rd seat if we think the hand will pass out" which gives them some leeway to defend against trap passes if they know you're doing it.

[awm]

As for "bad bridge" I'd tend to agree that opening balanced 8-counts probably isn't winning tactics. But it looks substantially better than it might otherwise when:

(1) You can arrange your follow-up methods with these hands in mind.
(2) You don't have to disclose or alert this opening style in any way (so opponents will be surprised).

The first is certainly true, and the second seems to apply when this style is only in effect in 3rd seat (in 1st seat disclosure would be required).

[vang]

gwnn, on Apr 30 2007, 07:56 PM, said:

in Romania it is strictly forbidden to open weaker hands than 10hcp (as part of a system. otherwise of course you can psyche anything but a strong 1 or 2♣ opener) or the ones that dont satisfy the rule of 18. this is a bit ambiguous (can one still open a 10 hcp 4333 hand systemically?) but in any case it's a guideline. the rule doesn't treat seats differently.

There are no exceptions for certain events. in Romania all tourneys are equal (at least as an alerting procedure), regional or national, teams or pairs.

(in Romania) only the opening in first 2 positions must have either at least 10 hcp OR the rule of 18 (which means 10hcp 4333 is ok; 8 hcp 5521 is ok etc).
you may open anything in 3rd pos (except psyhic strong system opening).