[trevahound]

I normally play variable NT ranges, baby in most seats, but with 3rd hot and all 4th seats different. This is in the context of a big club where we open all 10 counts. I would like to play 3rd seat non-vul only that we open a 0-13 hcpt 1nt (propertly announced), and play no systems or conventions over that, as pard can hardly hold an invite (at least as an experiment). I believe this will be ACBL GCC legal, though unpopular. Is there a reason this would not be legal in ACBL land? Thank you -

[Bbradley62]

ACBL GCC ( http://www.acbl.org/...ntion-Chart.pdf ) includes:

Quote

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

[trevahound]

Bbradley62, on 2014-March-11, 17:17, said:

ACBL GCC ( http://www.acbl.org/...ntion-Chart.pdf ) includes:

Thank you. Then it would follow that 8-13 would be legal?

[Bbradley62]

Depends on the rest of your system. I guess I should have included this:

Quote

DISALLOWED
7. CONVENTIONAL RESPONSES, REBIDS AND A CONVENTIONAL DEFENSE TO AN OPPONENT’S CONVENTIONAL DEFENSE after natural notrump opening bids or overcalls with a lower limit of fewer than 10 HCP or with a range of greater than 5 HCP (including those that have two non-consecutive ranges) and weak two-bids which by partnership agreement are not within a range of 7 HCP and do not show at least five cards in the suit.

[mycroft]

So, basically, legal. But pass over 1NTx means "I want to play 1NT doubled", redouble is also natural; 2♣ showing clubs - and you'd better not use it for the "you pick" runout either, either through a further redouble or by inference; if they overcall 2♦ no matter what it means, all your bids are natural (so no 2♥ takeout of hearts when 2♦ shows hearts) again, including pass and double.

I've done it before; it's never come up.

Oh, and it better be balanced, too. Expect even the people who are happy with "1NT with a singleton, but it's 4414 with a stiff K or A" to be - less pleased - when you also have an 8-count, or play this 8-13 and happen to open a 4315 that nobody's blinking at were it 15-17. Legitimately, too; it will look like you have an incentive to push the "balanced" boundary of this disruptive call, and may in fact be pushing the boundaries more than is legal in the ACBL.

[Bbradley62]

I don't know how ACBL defines such things, but I'd call 8-13HCP a 6-point range, because there are 6 possible point counts included. If that's how ACBL counts, you couldn't play Stayman or transfers over it.

[trevahound]

Bbradley62, on 2014-March-11, 17:56, said:

I don't know how ACBL defines such things, but I'd call 8-13HCP a 6-point range, because there are 6 possible point counts included. If that's how ACBL counts, you couldn't play Stayman or transfers over it.

No stayman, no transfers, no conventions at all -- that part I'm clear on. Fortunately, they can't legislate that responder be dealt a 5 card suit. I wouldn't want to play transfers even if I could over that -- why give them that much more opportunity to penalize?

Thanks all-

[blackshoe]

You can't play any conventions over an 8-13 1NT because the lower end of the range is below 10 HCP. The wider range is just icing on the cake.

I could be convinced to play this range solely because of the way the ACBL treats a 10-12 or 10-13 1NT, ruling routinely that if you open on a nine count you have an illegal agreement (even if you've never done it before when you've been playing this range for ten years). This isn't a rational way to rule the game, it's "we don't like the mini-NT, but it's a natural bid and we can't ban it, so we're going to take every opportunity to screw with people that use it". The funny thing is that it's been six years (well, five in the Western Hemisphere) since the laws were changed to allow the RA to ban even natural bids if they don't like them. Either the ACBL hasn't yet figured that out, or they're happy with the negative culture they've established regarding this bid.The regulation in place is legal, of course. However, from the viewpoint of the reason for it, I wouldn't call it ethical.

[pran]

Is there any 9HCP hand that would not be opened?
If so then PASS in your system could show a hand stronger than a hand (8HCP) that would be opened at the one-level. I suppose that will be BS also in ACBL?

[barmar]

pran, on 2014-March-12, 01:42, said:

Is there any 9HCP hand that would not be opened?
If so then PASS in your system could show a hand stronger than a hand (8HCP) that would be opened at the one-level. I suppose that will be BS also in ACBL?

Is it really the case that existence of a hand that would pass with more HCP than one that would be bid at the 1-level makes the system BS? That makes Rule of 20 BS, since you'll open 5-5 10 counts, but pass 4333 12 counts.

I thought the criteria for BS is that the pass shows a hand stronger than one that would be opened at the 1-level, not just that it might be stronger.

[mycroft]

Yes it may be a BS convention in the ACBL, but like being a member of the NRA in Norway, irrelevant.

[RMB1]

Does BS apply to GCC, mid-chart, etc.?

[blackshoe]

The term "brown sticker" has no meaning in the ACBL regulatory structure.

[pran]

barmar, on 2014-March-12, 09:42, said:

Is it really the case that existence of a hand that would pass with more HCP than one that would be bid at the 1-level makes the system BS? That makes Rule of 20 BS, since you'll open 5-5 10 counts, but pass 4333 12 counts.

I thought the criteria for BS is that the pass shows a hand stronger than one that would be opened at the 1-level, not just that it might be stronger.

What is the difference?

Would you expect it OK to have a system where PASS in an opening position shows either 0 HCP or at least 16 HCP?

[barmar]

pran, on 2014-March-12, 10:33, said:

What is the difference?

Would you expect it OK to have a system where PASS in an opening position shows either 0 HCP or at least 16 HCP?

The issue isn't what the Pass shows, the issue is with the opening 1-bid -- is it ALWAYS a stronger hand (just counting HCP) than one that would be passed? I gave an extremely common example where this is not the case.