Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Sam Dinkin
1 2 3 4 ... 19 20 21 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The committee is making a bunch of good liberalizations. Let's not escalate from thankless please.
Feb. 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Conventional responses are allowed, but opponents may play defenses that would be disallowed over natural bids.
Feb. 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes, disallowed opening 15 is problematic. It should be reworded to “without a known 4-card suit”. Otherwise it can fairly easily be evaded by including a non-three suiter pattern (643?) and then satisfy constructive definition 18a without infringing disallowed opening 15.
Feb. 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Not natural changes permissible defenses (Disallowed overcalls 1&2 no longer apply).
Feb. 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It looks like it satisfies 18a and is not otherwise banned so is allowed. It's not “natural” however so opponents can play defenses that would otherwise be banned by disallowed overcalls 1&2.
Feb. 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Andrew, the current definition found on the alert chart is 4+ in a major and 3+ in a minor. ACBL attempted to ban 4 card openers at the two level that could be less than 10 HCP by banning conventions over them before regulators had the authority to ban them altogether. (Though a Precision 2 got grandfathered in because it must be a 3 suiter). 4441 has also been banned for 1NT below the superchart.

I have an idea: maybe we could get a law change insisting that hands be redealt if anyone has a 4=4=4=1 pattern.

More seriously, allow a quasi-natural 2m to include balanced and 4441.
Feb. 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You're right, but if someone bids something natural and conventional, e.g., 1 natural showing (5+4+) clubs and third seat, we can't play 1 showing 15+ artificial no known suit according to overcalls 1. Can't play 1 asking for a stopper. Can't play 1 showing a stopper since they all have no known suit. Problem is primarily with Disallowed overcalls 1.

E.g., “After a Natural non-conventional opening bid, a new suit direct overcall below 2NT that does not show at least one of the following: a) one known 4+suit b) 3 known 3+cards suits c) an interest in playing No Trump.”
Feb. 19
Sam Dinkin edited this comment Feb. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The WBF policy is a little ambiguous:
“A pair may prepare written defences against the Brown Sticker elements of any system. Such defences will have to be given to the opponents (two clearly legible copies) at an appropriate time and place prior to the start of that segment, to be specified in the Con­di­tions of Contest. Written defences against Brown Sticker conventions are deemed to be part of the opponents' system card.”

If you're going to have defenses required for the RR, I suggest that it be something to the effect of the following:
1. Pairs playing a midchart method requiring a defense should provide two copies of the ACBL defenses to that method that the opponents may refer to during the auction. (Alternatively, 4 copies and let both pairs refer to it too.) Pairs may also provide an alternative defense.
2. Pairs defending against midchart methods requiring a defense may refer to a copy of their defense to this method during the auction.
Feb. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Tim/Michael, with the definition of direct overcalls, anything goes after the response to an opening bid, even a natural response to a natural opening. But whether an opening bid is defined to be natural or artificial has consequences. Banana custard doesn't seem to.
Feb. 19
Sam Dinkin edited this comment Feb. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Overcalls 1 has the same problem. If there's a natural call that shows two suits at the one level there's a two-level cue bid of the 2nd suit they showed and possibly a one-level cue bid too. Unless you define “new suit”, you've banned the cue bid of the implied suit. (Again, if you say natural and non-conventional, you ought to be fine.)
Feb. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Jeff G, natural treatments can cross into conventions without being artificial. Odd natural treatments like 1 on any hand with 3+ should probably also be alerts. The laws should be updated to reflect that if you bid hearts when you have hearts it's natural even if you're also showing spades.
Feb. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
E.g., vs. 2 Flannery, someone might want to play 2NT for t/o including spades.
Feb. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Well done! The case for 2-step bids not being purely destructive over forcing bids is as follows: P would be if you made the one step bid and double would be if you made the 2-step bid. If the second step was not forcing, the two meanings could be flipped.

If you still think it's purely destructive, at least consider two-step bids that are below 3NT when opponents are in a game force.
Feb. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I suggest adding definition 18.h. constructive: The lowest overcall. I.e., 1-1 the 1 call can't be destructive. And 18.i. the second lowest overcall of a forcing bid.
Feb. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Given the definition of psychic controls, I withdraw the comment about opening psychic controls. It's still possible for a direct overcall to reveal that an initial pass was psyched e.g. 4th seat opener.
Feb. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
But two-suited calls can be natural. Maybe natural and non-conventional should go in certain places?
Feb. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I should have been clearer–do you want to permit suit bids to suggest playing NT?

Also, do you intend to ban Fishbein after weak twos?
Feb. 17
Sam Dinkin edited this comment Feb. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It's best that a 3-card minor 2-level or 3-level response or rebid should be permissible on all charts. As to whether it's artificial or natural seems like a moot point.
Feb. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Suggest considering adding opening and overcall disallowed: psychic controls. Preventing the control of a psyche of pass.

Related: Opening bids 2 seems to allow 15+ one level and 0-14 opening pass. It's mostly a moot point since there appear to be no permissible non-pass 1st seat calls for 0-7 hands without 5-card suits.
Feb. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Overcalls 2b. Suggest 3 known 3+suits to permit NT for takeout over artificial calls that show 0 or 2+ suits and to clarify a situation where a suit has been shown but not bid.
Feb. 17
1 2 3 4 ... 19 20 21 22
.

Bottom Home Top