hrothgar, on 2011-February-15, 08:07, said:
Unfortunately, reading/understanding the ACBL convention charts is often more a matter of art than science.
For whatever reason, the ACBL treats the all purpose 1♣ bids very differently than "all purpose" 1♦ bids.
The ACBL wants Polish Club to be legal, therefore a Polish style 1C opening is deemed to be all purpose
The ACBL wants Precision to be legal, therefore Precision 1D openings that promise 0+ Diamond are deemed to be all purpose.
The ACBL doesn't want any MOSCITO variants to be legal, therefore a 1D opening that explictly promises 4+ Spades is not considered all purpose.
I think that the organization has its head up its ass and that they should provide clear guidance on these types of issues rahter than forcing people to waste lots of time and effort mastering the fine art of reading tea leaves...
Sorry if some of this frustration spilled over...
I just heard back from the ACBL. Here is a copy of the e-mail that I sent them, and their reply.
My e-mail to them:
Hi, I had a question about the GCC, and was told I should contact the ACBL. I hope this is the right e-mail adress to contact. If not, please send me the right one, and ignore the rest of this e-mail.
The GCC allows a bid of 1 Clubs or 1 Diamonds to be "An all purpose opening bid, natural or artificial, promising a minimum of 10 high card points." There are some questions, however, as to what an "All purpose bid" is.
For instance, is it allowed to have one of these bids show: 10-12 points and a 5 card minor with an unbalanced hand OR 17+ points with a 4+ card major.
Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Chris Senkler
Their reply:
These appear to fit the 'all-purpose' category.
Rick Beye
So it would apear that "all-purpose" is slightly more broad than you were giving it credit for.
I share some of your frustration with the ACBL over their regulations. Some people say that in any game, cirtain moves are legal and others are not, such as in chess, you can only move a pawn a cirtain distance. However, this is a false comparison, because other games regulate the mechanics, not the intent. Saying "You can open with a bid of 2
♦, but it can't mean XYZ" is a bit like chess authorities saying "You can open with e4, but you can't be trying for a quick checkmate." The ACBL is free to regulate mechanics, such as informing the opponents of the meaning of the bid, what information needs to be on the card, and even whether or not you can open with a bid of, say, 3
♥. They seem to move into questionable territory, however, when they regulate the ideas behind those mechanics... just my opinion.
I am relieved to see, however, that when it comes to the 1
♣ and 1
♦ bids, they can mean prety much anything, so long as they promise 10 points. I assume that this is because the ACBL has such a strong aversion to preemption, while they hve very little problem with constructive bids (even though both are viable strategies). 1
♣ and 1
♦ are the least preemptive bids possible, and if they promise 10+ points, then they cannot be used destructively in even the slightest way.
I believe that where MOSCITO tends to get in trouble is with their 1NT and 2 level openings, because they are preemptive and considered destructive.
I appreciate your advice to go and check with them. I didn't realize that a nobody player like me could actually consult with them, which is why I was posting my question here.
Help
