[nige1]

bluejak, on Nov 30 2009, 03:36 PM, said:

If you held that hand, what action would your partner expect you to take?  If the answer is to open 1♠ you have an illegal agreement.  If the answer is - as it is with my partnership - "How on earth would I know what she would do?" then you have no illegal agreement. There is some confusion here between what anyone might do and what is allowed.  What is allowed is clear.

We read Bluejak's previous statement that he would open 1♠. Do we have an illegal understanding with Bluejak?

[nige1]

nige1, on Nov 30 2009, 02:54 PM, said:

And belatedly, I am trying to accept the idea that which 0-7 HCP hands you may open depends (inter alia) on director judgement related to their frequency.

gnasher, on Nov 30 2009, 01:43 PM, said:

Nobody has said that.

I' m sorry if I misrepresent other peoples' arguments but I'm afraid that is how I interpret statements like ...

gnasher, on Nov 28 2009, 08:03 AM, said:

The restriction quoted by StevenG prevents your agreeing to open 6-5 7-count.  Those hands are an order of magnitude more common than the one in the original post.  It doesn't seem inconsistent to say that:
- You may not explicitly agree to open a 7-count or worse
- 6-5 7-counts occur sufficiently often that a partnership might form an implicit agreement to open them.  That would be against the rules.
- 7-5 7-counts occur so rarely that it's unlikely that a partnership would form an implicit agreement to open them.

[gnasher]

nige1, on Nov 30 2009, 10:24 PM, said:

nige1, on Nov 30 2009, 02:54 PM, said:

And belatedly, I am trying to accept the idea that which 0-7 HCP hands you may open depends (inter alia) on director judgement related to their frequency.

gnasher, on Nov 30 2009, 01:43 PM, said:

Nobody has said that.

I' m sorry if I misrepresent other peoples' arguments but I'm afraid that is how I interpret statements like ...

gnasher, on Nov 28 2009, 08:03 AM, said:

The restriction quoted by StevenG prevents your agreeing to open 6-5 7-count.  Those hands are an order of magnitude more common than the one in the original post.  It doesn't seem inconsistent to say that:
- You may not explicitly agree to open a 7-count or worse
- 6-5 7-counts occur sufficiently often that a partnership might form an implicit agreement to open them.  That would be against the rules.
- 7-5 7-counts occur so rarely that it's unlikely that a partnership would form an implicit agreement to open them.

The statement of mine that you have just quoted uses the phrases "agree to open" and "form an implicit agreement". The statement of yours that I objected to uses the phrase "hands you may open". I'm sure you understand perfectly well the difference.

[nige1]

nige1, on Nov 30 2009, 02:54 PM, said:

And belatedly, I am trying to accept the idea that which 0-7 HCP hands you may open depends (inter alia) on director judgement related to their frequency.

gnasher, on Nov 30 2009, 01:43 PM, said:

Nobody has said that.

nige1, on Nov 30 2009, 10:24 PM, said:

I' m sorry if I misrepresent other peoples' arguments but I'm afraid that is how I interpret statements like ...

gnasher, on Nov 28 2009, 08:03 AM, said:

The restriction quoted by StevenG prevents your agreeing to open 6-5 7-count.  Those hands are an order of magnitude more common than the one in the original post.  It doesn't seem inconsistent to say that:
- You may not explicitly agree to open a 7-count or worse
- 6-5 7-counts occur sufficiently often that a partnership might form an implicit agreement to open them.  That would be against the rules.
- 7-5 7-counts occur so rarely that it's unlikely that a partnership would form an implicit agreement to open them.

gnasher, on Nov 30 2009, 06:13 PM, said:

The statement of mine that you have just quoted uses the phrases "agree to open" and "form an implicit agreement".  The statement of yours that I objected to uses the phrase "hands you may open".  I'm sure you understand perfectly well the difference.

We seem to be repeating ourselves. I think I've made clear that I understand the difference.
Unless there is an admission of an illegal agreement, the director is called when there is doubt whether an action (here a 1♠ opening bid) is legally based. Presumably, it is then that you may want to compute hand frequencies.