[pigpenz]

Was playing in ACBL game and opp opened a 12hcp one club forcing. Called the director at the end of the hand to report. What are the min. requirements for this bid. It used to be in ACBL games you were not allowed to psyche artificial strong bids. Wonder how many other times this pair has done this and gotten away with it.

hand:

---

I dont know maybe their one bids are weaker???

[jillybean]

How did the director rule?

[inquiry]

I think Polish club is outlawed in ACBL (that is, two way club, weak or strong). But I know a lot of people who play 1♣ can not be passed even though it is not "forcing" (no special conventions over it.

Having said that, I think this 1♣ with nice hearts show a specific conventional agreement that probably violates the specialized rules of ACBL. You need to talk the yellow ACBL or several of teh ACBL_## to see how they feel.

Outside of the comfortable confines of the highly restricted ACBL event, however, a forcing 1♣ on this hand is not outrageous. This hand is a lot stronger than many 1♣ forcing hands wiht 16 hcp. By Zar standards this is a 33 point hand, nearly a full AQ more than a minimum opening hand. If 16 hcp is your standard for open 1C, and 10 hcp is your minimum standard for opeing one of a suit, that means this is easily equavalent to 16 hcp (AQ better than you minimum opening bid). That doesn't make it legal in ACBL however.

Report the players if you must and move on.

Ben

[mycroft]

Right - let's try to deal with ACBL regulations.

1. You may not under the GCC psych artificial or conventional opening bids. A guideline (but only a guideline) is that if you're within a point or a card of it, it's just a deviation rather than a "gross distortion" of length or strength.

Note - some "one card"s are more "gross" than others. People trying 4-4 Flannery because it's "just a card off" get what they deserve.

2. 1C can be natural, or can be assigned any meaning provided it promises 10 HCP. ANY meaning - including Polish Club, or "denies clubs" or "denies a 4-card Major".

3. 1D can be used as a forcing, artificial response to 1C, no matter what 1C shows.

4. Conventional calls in response to 1C can be: game-forcing, no matter what 1C is, or anything, provided 1C promises 15 HCP (or a jump-shift or Flannery raise, independent of opening agreement).

What does that mean for the situation below? Well, I know several people who's "Precision 1C" can be as low as 12 - provided it's A, A, A. I don't agree with it, but it's legal, as long as it's explained, because they have no conventional NGF responses (except 1D, of course).

If you call Axx KJTxxx ATxx --, which is a 5 1/2 loser hand, and frankly will make game opposite most 8-counts with an 8-card fit in either minor or clubs, a "strong 1C", more power to you. I'd feel better if the pointed suits were switched; I wouldn't do it even then; but it's GCC legal. It might not be legal to explain it as "Precision" (in fact, it isn't - "the name of the convention is not sufficient" - but ignoring that quibble for the moment) - and I would definately expect that the opponents are made aware that distribution plays a big factor in "strong" 1C, but there's nothing GCC illegal about having this agreement (in fact, when I play "Beta", it's a *good* strong 1C hand - but we open 1C on 13+ if unbalanced).

So, it could be a (n illegal) psychic, it could be a (legal, but "Precision" is MI) valid 1C opener in their system, it could be a deviation from their legal, but not "Precision" 1C opener.

I think that's all the rebuttals to that which has been said.

Michael.

[pbleighton]

Michael:

I think I agree with you, but to be sure:

1) Legally, the 1C artificial bid can have as little as 10 hcp, so opening this hand 1C is fine. I wouldn't call it a psyche, rather a very aggressive upgrade.
2) You can deviate from an announced minimum by 1, or EXCEPTIONALLY, more points with extra playing strength, and not need to alert that. It's "just bridge".
3) I wouldn't open the posted hand 1C. For me, 14 counts need to be really excellent to upgrade to 1C, let alone 12 counts - this hand is a very good 12 count but I'd want another queen to open 1C - though I realize much better players than I would upgrade it. However, if someone ROUTINELY open hands like the one posted 1C then their card and announcement should be something like "16 hcp or x playing tricks" or "16 hcp, may be as low as y with extra distribution".

Do I understand you?

Peter

[hrothgar]

inquiry, on Aug 15 2005, 09:50 PM, said:

I think Polish club is outlawed in ACBL (that is, two way club, weak or strong). But I know a lot of people who play 1♣ can not be passed even though it is not "forcing" (no special conventions over it.

Polish club is absolutely legal in GCC events

[inquiry]

hrothgar, on Aug 15 2005, 06:16 PM, said:

inquiry, on Aug 15 2005, 09:50 PM, said:

I think Polish club is outlawed in ACBL (that is, two way club, weak or strong). But I know a lot of people who play 1♣ can not be passed even though it is not "forcing" (no special conventions over it.

Polish club is absolutely legal in GCC events

Well, systemically, you can not play the full system in ACBL events. I have observed very Loud shouts for the director when some of the Polish auctions are used. The 1♣ bid itself, is of course legal. But others are not, so you can not play the SYSTEM. Just as I usually can't play multi-2D

[hrothgar]

Comment 1: as others have noted, you can't psyche a "strong" club. The minimum strength for a strong club opening is 15 HCP. Opening this on the example hand or the 3 aces and out example would clearly count as a psyche. I suspect that you'd run into the same sorts of issues if you opened a Polish style 1♣ and then treated the hand as strong.

Comment 2: Even if you could open this 1♣, it strikes me as bad bridge to do so. Distributional hands like this one can present a lot of problems in strong clubs systems. On the one hand, they lack high cards. With this said and done, they often make up for this with overall playing strength.

From my perspective, the most important criteria to use in deciding whether to open is the ability to control the auction. If you have a lot of shape, you need to anticipate some nasty preemption by the opponents. If you open this hand with a strong club and you have an auction like

1♣ - (2♦) - X - (4♥)

where 2♦ = Hearts or the black suits and
4♥ = pass or correct

are you going to be happy?

Personally, I've found that its important to start showing shape as early as possible with these hands. your milage may vary.

[pigpenz]

I think from reading the ACBL regulatons it has to be at aleast 15HCP

[luke warm]

don't know how the td ruled, but i always thought like richard that a 1c bid, if it was strong, artificial, and forcing, can not be psyched (same as 2c can't be)

however, if the 1c here was alerted as simply "forcing" and if nobody asked point ranges, it probably is ok

[pbleighton]

"I think from reading the ACBL regulatons it has to be at aleast 15HCP"

This is only true if you want to be able to use any and all responses and rebids (#6 in Responses and Rebids of the GCC). The artificial 1C bid can guarantee as little as 10 hcp and still be GCC legal (#1 in Opening Bids), which is why the Polish 1C is legal.

Richard, I disagree that opening this hand 1C is a psyche. I agree that is a mistake in judgment to do so. However, if you do so, the alerted meaning should convey this possibility to the opps, one way or another. This is perhaps a minor quibble, but what you see as pysche I see as inadequate alerting.

Peter

[helene_t]

I don't understand this. The 1♣ opening looks like a beginner's mistake. Do you get a penalty as well if you underlead an ace against a trump contract?

[awm]

From ACBL's viewpoint, anyone playing a strong ♣ can't really be a beginner, and such people have some responsibilities for knowing their methods.

The issue is, ACBL doesn't want to allow artificial non-game forcing responses to non-strong openings. I guess they think it's hard to defend against. But it seems like people could get around this by claiming to play a "strong club" and then just opening most 12-counts with 1♣. So they deal with that by severely penalizing anyone who "psychs" a strong club opening.

Of course, there are some issues with the insistance on the high card point count. In fact, from one of ACBL's more bizarre rulings, if you play 2/1 it's perfectly legal to open a strong 2♣ with:

xx
x
AKQxxxxxx
x

However, this would not be a legal precision 1♣ opening (would be considered a psych):

AKQxxxxxx
Ax
x
x

Can't say I agree with this, but those are the rules!

[helene_t]

awm, on Aug 16 2005, 09:08 AM, said:

From ACBL's viewpoint, anyone playing a strong ♣ can't really be a beginner, and such people have some responsibilities for knowing their methods.

Lol. I suppose there are people who would say that anyone who plays 5-card majors can't be a beginner. Or anyone who plays weak twos can't be a beginner. Or negative doubles.

If it's really true that people who play SA are allowed to make foolish bids and people who play WJ or Precision are not, it would be better to disallow all non-SAYC systems I think. Would essentially be the same but much clearer.

[mycroft]

Richard, Peter, if I opened that hand 1♣, it would be a psychic. My agreement for 1♣ is "16+, 17+ if balanced, could be an exceptional 15". If their agreement is "Precision", I believe it's a psychic, because a Precision 1♣ is pretty much the agreement above. Note, however, that many ACBL players equate "strong club" with "Precision", even some of those that play strong clubs. Reason #14,506 for not explaining using name of convention.

If their agreement is "strong, usually 14+, could be 10 HCP with really wild distribution", then it's not a psychic. It might be bad judgement, it might be a stupid system, but it's not a psychic. Similarly, if I opened that a Beta 1C (any 13+ unbal, 16+ bal), it wouldn't be a psychic - it would be a reasonable evaluation.

A psychic is defined as a "gross and deliberate deviation" from agreements. So it's the agreement that makes the hand a psychic or not, not the 13 cards, or whether it would be legal or not to have an agreement that this hand is bid this way.

Now, the other half of the story is that if 1♣ doesn't guarantee 15, then you don't get to play (most) conventional responses after it (except for 1D ART forcing, GF responses, legal conventional jump shifts, doubles and redoubles, ...) But as Polish and Swedish Club players around the ACBL have shown, it is possible to play a perfectly workable system without that.

I don't believe "three aces and out" is a strong club, and I definately don't want to be GF with AAA opposite a random 8-count, but then again I don't play it. As long as this pair describes their hand as "strong, 16+ or 6 AK controls" - and defines AK controls if necessary - then they can do what they want.

So, either: their agreement is such that this hand is a psychic, in which case the ACBL should do their "illegal convention" thing (which is "no specific penalties, but score adjustments if the other side is damaged". I'm not sure I agree with this, but I don't make the rules); their agreement encompasses this hand, and it was explained improperly (in which case, we have an ordinary MI case); or it's within the agreement, it was explained properly, in which case everything's fine.

I don't know which one it is; I've only heard one side of the story and was not the ACBL director at the game.

Ben: I am sure that most people who think PC is illegal in the ACBL are thinking of either the Multi or Wilkosz 2D opener. Of course the only thing I've ever had a problem with was one PC-ish pair who played a 1H ART, NGF, disambiguating relay over their "strong NT or 5+diamonds" 1D opener.

Michael.

[pigpenz]

The ACBL has been regulating what they consider to be an opening bid, Bridge World just two months ago wa advocating that the WBF not cave into the ACBL. The only thing I could find in the ACBL rules is that you are not allowed to psyche an artificial strong bid below the level of 2NT. So you could psyche 2NT, 3NT, etc.

So if this was done in an ACBL game than those rules should apply.