[blackshoe]

inquiry, on May 28 2008, 05:38 AM, said:

samuelgl, on May 28 2008, 04:32 AM, said:

hi, all, does anyone give me a link of GCC?  Thanks.

http://web2.acbl.org/documentlibrary/units...vChart12_03.pdf is a link to the GCC... note, you will need adobe reader to read this.

That particular version of the ACBL convention charts has been superseded at least once. I think the latest version is here.

Edit: actually, the latest version is in the minutes of the Detroit BoD meeting, but it doesn't go into effect (and is not, I'm told "ready for publication" yet) until July. I forget the exact date.

This post has been edited by blackshoe: 2008-May-28, 12:17

[samuelgl]

Thanks to inquiry, jtfanclub and blackshoe. Thanks agian.

[Gerben42]

In the USBF trials I saw a player opening 1NT with a singleton. No director was called. Are they using different rules?

[helene_t]

Gerben42, on Jun 3 2008, 08:28 AM, said:

In the USBF trials I saw a player opening 1NT with a singleton. No director was called. Are they using different rules?

My guess would be that the USBF trials are not GCC

[jtfanclub]

Gerben42, on Jun 3 2008, 02:28 AM, said:

In the USBF trials I saw a player opening 1NT with a singleton. No director was called. Are they using different rules?

You're allowed to open 1NT with a singleton, even in GCC. Just can't do it very often or have a method to field the singleton. Kind of a weird half-psyche.

[mycroft]

In a file I used to quote, but it's no longer on the ACBL web site (it is in the tech files and in the club handbook, though), the requirements are:

ACBL said:

If your notrump opening shows a balanced hand, you may occasionally pick up a hand with a singleton, which you may want to treat as balanced. You may use your bridge judgment to open or overcall
a notrump with a singleton, provided that:
1. It is a rare occurrence (no more than 1% of the time) and,
2. Partner expects you to have at least two cards in each suit and,
3. You and your partner have no agreements which enable you to discover that partner has a singleton.

[example and discussion about judgement snipped]

If, however, your opponent has opened 1NT with an outlandish distribution — 6–5–1–1, 6–4–3–0 or some such — or has agreements about one-of-a-suit opening bids or other openings which mean that they have to open all 4–4–4–1 hands with 1NT, you should report such to the director. The director should determine whether the pair’s notrump opening is natural or conventional.

Clearly if it's common enough that it's noted in the system description for 1NT (especially "all hands" of a certain strength), it's outside the bounds. The occasional one, especially with a singleton A or K, isn't really a psychic, it's "stick a diamond in with my heart, 'cause this hand's balanced, and anyone with any judgement would agree with me".

[helene_t]

I think it's bizar that the restriction applies to 1NT overcalls as well. Also, I thought stiff K and A were exempted.

[Gerben42]

That's why my advice in my Fantunes system is to pass with 12 and 4441, and with 13 and 4441 either overbid 1m or bid 1NT anyway.

The chance of getting exactly 4441 with 13 is 7% of 3% or about one in 500. Is that rare enough?

I didn't have one of these in the entire league season of 196 boards (played 2/3 of the matches). Not surprising, of course. And then there are the cases where someone opens in front of you.

[awm]

While the ACBL policy about singletons gets a lot of flak, they're just trying to deal with a fundamental problem in regulating agreements while not regulating bids.

The point is that there are certain things you are not allowed to agree to do. Opening notrump with a singleton is such a thing in ACBL-land... but most places have things you can't agree to do, for example agreeing to open 1♠ with a 3334 zero-count is banned in most places, as is agreeing to open 2♥ with both weak hands with hearts and weak hands with spades.

But of course you're allowed to psych. How many times do I have to bid 2♥ on a weak hand with spades before it becomes a de facto (and illegal) agreement? How many times do I have to psych 1♠ on random zero counts before it becomes an agreement? How many times do I have to open 1NT with a singleton before it's an agreement and not a psych?

There is no real answer to this, but it does seem reasonable that if I have follow-up methods allowing partner to determine what has occurred then it's an agreement and not a psych and also that if partner's choice of follow-up actions seems to create leeway for the hand type then it's an agreement and that if my methods permit no other call with the particular hand type then it's an agreement.

[blackshoe]

awm, on Jun 9 2008, 05:52 PM, said:

There is no real answer to this, but it does seem reasonable that if I have follow-up methods allowing partner to determine what has occurred then it's an agreement and not a psych and also that if partner's choice of follow-up actions seems to create leeway for the hand type then it's an agreement and that if my methods permit no other call with the particular hand type then it's an agreement.

I'm not quite sure what you're saying here. It seems like you're saying that a deliberate and gross misstatement of honor strength or suit length cannot be a psych if your partnership has (conventional? non-conventional?) methods which will allow your partner to discover (or you to reveal) that you have psyched. If I've read you right, I don't agree.

If your "psych" doesn't take partner by surprise, it's not a psych. If it does, it is. Nothing to do with follow on methods.

[slayerbill]

My solution is too play the forcing one-bids as 4-carders, specifically possible canapes. All your 4441's go into those openings. Of course you may still have to pass some of the the weaker ones. It's not perfect either, but it avoids the 1nt problem, not that that is the main intent of playing canape here.