[TimG]

From the GCC Allowed sections:

7. DEFENSE TO:
a) conventional calls (except see #10 RESPONSES and REBIDS above
and #7 under DISALLOWED below),

(The two exceptions involve natural NT openings and overcalls and weak twos.)

My question is: can my defense to a strong club take place before the strong club opening, can it be anticipatory or preparatory?

[TylerE]

I can't imagine why.

[mycroft]

I think if you tried to argue that, it wouldn't work. For one thing a similar argument causes the preempts vs Fishbein infinite loop, which has been curtailed by effectively saying that you can't change your system based on the opponents' defences.

And if that's the case, the same argument applies to everybody else's strong (2) club(s) system. As I say, good luck getting it to fly.

[Cascade]

Why not "attack is the best form of defense".

I doubt the regulators or the director will accept this argument though.

[mycroft]

Heh, I guess if you can guarantee they're going to open an artificial club, go ahead. But if your predefence happens to hit a 1H opener on your left, you've just used a convention not allowed on the GCC against natural calls. (yes, this is a joke)

[han]

The same argument would work against a strong 2C, so basically you would be allowed to play any openings you want as long as the opponents play one or more artificial bids. The answer is so obvious that I expect it was known to Tim.

[rbforster]

Do you part to educate the club players to HUMs - play your 2♥ overcall as non-forcing multi over any short clubs you find. 2+ clubs is artificial, so anything goes!

[TimG]

han, on Dec 15 2008, 02:58 PM, said:

The same argument would work against a strong 2C, so basically you would be allowed to play any openings you want as long as the opponents play one or more artificial bids. The answer is so obvious that I expect it was known to Tim.

Well, I hadn't really thought it through that much. I think there are players who adjust their opening style when facing a strong club system on the theory that if they get in the auction first they can take away the opponents' well oiled system. I'm not sure even this is legal, now that I think about it a bit more. But, if it is, I wonder how big a step it is to playing different conventions in order to "pre-counter" the club.

[Sadie3]

The ACBL General Convention Chart also disallows opening one bids with less than 8 points as a partnership agreement, unless it is a psyche. The exact wording:

Under DISALLOWED:
"6. Opening one bids which by partnership agreement could show fewer than 8 HCP. (Not applicable to a psych.) "


Altering your bidding due to a big club system is a pretty common defense, but I'm not sure one can alter in anticipation except for maybe opening lighter than usual, but I'd be careful about how light. Maybe adding preempts with as few as 5 cards in the suit is a possiblity, but the higher the level you enter the auction, they more chance you get of having the dreaded -200 part score against you.

[xcurt]

Rob F, on Dec 15 2008, 03:07 PM, said:

Do you part to educate the club players to HUMs - play your 2♥ overcall as non-forcing multi over any short clubs you find.  2+ clubs is artificial, so anything goes!

Rather than make up a method yourself, just play Holo-Bolo against prepared minor openings.

Actually I think there is a sound theoretical reason for switching from "bridge mode" to "poker mode" with certain hands after the opponent opens 1-prepared-minor. And so I don't consider this unethical. You choose to play a convention, you deal with the effects. You choose to play an ill-defined conventional call, you need to pay the full price for adding it to your system.

[brianshark]

Here is a related but different question I was curious about:

If an artificial bid which shows something in particular is illegal as an opening but is legal as a defence to a strong club opening, can it be used as a defence to a strong pass opening?

[blackshoe]

brianshark, on Dec 16 2008, 07:02 AM, said:

Here is a related but different question I was curious about:

If an artificial bid which shows something in particular is illegal as an opening but is legal as a defence to a strong club opening, can it be used as a defence to a strong pass opening?

This question is not answerable. In the ACBL, because the strong pass is itself illegal. In a jurisdiction where strong pass is legal, because the RA may or may not permit such defences, and the only way to know which is to read the regulations.

[rbforster]

blackshoe, on Dec 16 2008, 10:55 AM, said:

This question is not answerable. In the ACBL, because the strong pass is itself illegal.

To be precise, forcing pass systems are not allowed in the ACBL. If you open all your 0-7 hands with a 2 level preempt, you could conceivably play a "constructive pass" which showed 8-11 for example if you really wanted (and open your 12+ hands normally). You could even pass with stronger hands if you want, but it can't be forcing (and partner will have a hard time since most ferts are not allowed, only natural weak preempts basically).

[shevek]

In Australia, where strong pass is sometimes legal, pairs tried the idea of passing 1st in hand with 19+ balanced as a defence.
Richman, playing natural, caught Burgess once at all vul, after
No* (1S*) no (no)
X

Double showed this. 1S was 0-4 any and -1100 was the result. It was about 1985. Marston then switched back to 1H 0-7.

These days you can still try that but you need to lodge this defence and have written copies etc, since you are effectively playing a Yellow (HUM) system.

Note that we strong passers are not allowed to change our methods.
When I've picked up a Yarborough 2nd in hand, vul vs not and heard pass (alerted) on my right, I still bravely open 1S (0-7) and away we go. Survived so far, though it's been tempting to distort. Of course we could change our method to "Pass = 13+ unless RHO has made a pass which could be strong, then pass = 13+ or 0-7say." We don't bother. Give them a few free hits.

We do gamble a pass out in 4th seat occasionally so a strongish pass in 3rd seat as a defence is not a great idea. Can recall at least one "+620. Passed in."

Incidentally, that's why Forcing Pass is a misnomer. Strong Pass is more accurate, though - as David Morgan pointed out - Weak Opening System is best and would include some Medium Pass systems.

[blackshoe]

Rob F, on Dec 16 2008, 12:57 PM, said:

To be precise, forcing pass systems are not allowed in the ACBL. If you open all your 0-7 hands with a 2 level preempt, you could conceivably play a "constructive pass" which showed 8-11 for example if you really wanted (and open your 12+ hands normally). You could even pass with stronger hands if you want, but it can't be forcing (and partner will have a hard time since most ferts are not allowed, only natural weak preempts basically).

Sorry, but this is nonsense. First, no one, to my knowledge, plays the meaning you suggest, second, the term was "strong" pass, and I don't believe your proposed meaning qualifies as "strong".

[awm]

blackshoe, on Dec 16 2008, 09:52 PM, said:

Sorry, but this is nonsense. First, no one, to my knowledge, plays the meaning you suggest, second, the term was "strong" pass, and I don't believe your proposed meaning qualifies as "strong".

Actually, it is not clear to me what (if any) ACBL policy bans forcing pass.

The issue is that fert bids are disallowed, and that it is hard to structure your "responses" to forcing pass in a sensible way because they will presumably be restricted in the same way as openings. But I don't see any particular rules about passes.

Seems you could play:

first/second seat:
-- one of a suit shows 8-12 hcp natural 4+
-- 1NT 10-12
-- 2-level bids show 4+ in the bid suit and 0-7 points
-- pass shows 13+

third/fourth seat:
-- one of a suit shows 8+ hcp natural 4+
-- 1NT 10-12
-- 2-level bids show 4+ in the bid suit and 0-7 points
-- never pass in 3rd/4th

I mean, this is not a particularly good system or anything, but it's all natural bids so I don't see ACBL banning it.

[barmar]

awm, on Dec 17 2008, 02:01 AM, said:

Actually, it is not clear to me what (if any) ACBL policy bans forcing pass.

All three charts contain:

Quote

DISALLOWED
...
4. Forcing pass systems.

Not clear enough?

[shevek]

barmar, on Dec 17 2008, 02:16 AM, said:

awm, on Dec 17 2008, 02:01 AM, said:

Actually, it is not clear to me what (if any) ACBL policy bans forcing pass.

All three charts contain:

Quote

DISALLOWED
...
4. Forcing pass systems.

Not clear enough?

Not clear at all. Just glancing, I didn't see "forcing pass systems" defined.
If you play strong pass and pass up to 20 HCP & retain a strong 2C say, you have a strong pass system but not forcing.

They may get you some other way via ferts but probably not.
Pass could be 0-7 not shapely or 13-20 say. 1-level openings 8-12 all natural.
The WBF can call this HUM because you have a "an opening bid at the one level may be weaker than pass" but not the ACBL.
If I played in US, I'd have a go.

[H_KARLUK]

In Turkiye before we started to play Full Multi 2♦ [weak single suiter M, strong 2NT with any 5 cards, any 4441 ) we were playing weak 2M openings with in Goldman's Aces Scientific book Flannery(I think Mr Bill Flannery is an expert of Pittsburgh, USA]. Afterwards, many of us revised our CC as follows:
(Sys still 2/1 std oe 3/5 capp nmf revd 0314 minorwood)
A--1♥>1♠ (artificial, 0-4 cards, forcing NT)
1NT of opener rebid describes 2 ♦Flannery 11-15,♠ 4,♥ 5, 2-2 or 3/1 or 4-0 minors
B--1♥>1NT ♠ 5+ cards
C--2♥/♠ Muiderberg
D--Directly 2NT openings are either any 4333 or any 4432 19-21HCP

I will play Bridge when I get married in USA. Say bridge game regulations there disallow me to use 2♦ Multi convention. I will not feel myself bothered. No need, really. Everybody is not entitled to my opinions. But I am expected to play the game with their rules. If I like I play, if I dislike I do not play.

Instead I will try to find a way with my partner/s to understand each others styles within allowed Bridge Laws there.

When I was a new BBOer it was really hard for me to read partner's carding preferences (even a simple udca caused problems at table, cos I am used to play 3/5 throughout with first discard oe & a=att, k=count). Anyway we did not give up to make partnership. We played over 1,5 years and both pleased. Moreover I am lucky to find a bridge friend living in a foreign country. Hopefully i get a chance to visit him in Arizona. (And we are fans of same basketball team in NBA-Phoenix Suns<I also want to see Leandro Barbosa and Shaquille O'Neal performances in the live field>)

Say one day I coincidentially catch a chance to compete higher events. Again i will not feel myself bothered from their rules.

My advance apologies about trying to translate a proverb in my culture :
Turkish proverb : ya bu deveyi güdersin ya da bu diyardan gidersin
Possible English translation : Either you ride this camel or you go from this land. (Like acclimate or evacuate).

Camel mostly used in my culture proverbs to point out things with full of curves. I honestly declare it is not my cup of tea to point out any specific person/s. Similar proverb :
Camel told that his neck is curved, but he said oh what diffs, which part of my body is straight?
The meaning implied there is nothing perfect but we get used it in daily life with comfort since many years.

Maybe a funny way to express for anyone to "Conform or Leave". In some areas I saw a similar daily usage : Turkish "alış ya da sıvış" Possible English Translation : "Alış" (or infinitive "alışmak") means to adopt, acclimate, etc.
Turkish >ya da = either, or
"Turkish>Sıvış (or infinitive "sıvışmak") means to run away, go away, decamp, etc.
"Adopt or go away." I hope it is not another poor translation.

What I am sure it does not matter the place I visit. I simply must acclimate myself to the customs there or remain not interested. Life taught me not to cry over anything which won't cry over me.

This post has been edited by H_KARLUK: 2008-December-17, 10:38

[Cascade]

shevek, on Dec 17 2008, 08:30 PM, said:

barmar, on Dec 17 2008, 02:16 AM, said:

awm, on Dec 17 2008, 02:01 AM, said:

Actually, it is not clear to me what (if any) ACBL policy bans forcing pass.

All three charts contain:

Quote

DISALLOWED
...
4. Forcing pass systems.

Not clear enough?

Not clear at all. Just glancing, I didn't see "forcing pass systems" defined.
If you play strong pass and pass up to 20 HCP & retain a strong 2C say, you have a strong pass system but not forcing.

They may get you some other way via ferts but probably not.
Pass could be 0-7 not shapely or 13-20 say. 1-level openings 8-12 all natural.
The WBF can call this HUM because you have a "an opening bid at the one level may be weaker than pass" but not the ACBL.
If I played in US, I'd have a go.

I suggested the following system was GCC legal in some other thread:

Pass 0-4 or 15-20
1-level 8-14 Naturalish
1NT ART Force
2-level 5-7 Natural