BBO Discussion Forums: Is sandbagging a psyche bid? - BBO Discussion Forums

bluenikki, on 2019-October-14, 13:38, said:

The law says that "agreed meaning of a call or play shall not alter by reference to the member of the partnership by whom it is made (this requirement does not restrict style and judgement, only method)." A variance from agreed call based upon judgement or style does not imply or constitute a different method, IMO - assuming that by "light" you intend willingness to open hands that are downright ugly but exceed the agreed HCP requirements or to open most hands that reach the lower limit of HCP. If you intend consistently violating the agreed HCP limits then that is another matter of course.

bluenikki, on 2019-October-14, 13:38, said:

Al Roth would have opened that (As would Kaplan)

steve2005, on 2019-October-13, 21:26, said:

I checked with my inexperienced-Director wife, specifically about the practice advocated in many (if perhaps a bit old-fashioned) books and intermediate courses, that there are hands that are too strong to open a pre-empt, but not strong enough to open a 1-bid (not my style, but still quite a popular one).

For example, per http://www.pittsburg...z/JRKLess05.pdf , a weak two guarantees at least 2 of the top 4 honors in the opened suit, and is never opened with two outside Aces or Kings; so, QJTxxx-Kx-Kx-xxx cannot be opened 2♠ because of the two outside Kings... while QJTxxx-Kx-xx-xxx, weaker by 1 King, can be opened 2♠. But that does not mean that in the first hand you have to open 1♠ -- a pass is of course perfectly OK... even though if you "take away some honors" you would open.

She believes this style is perfectly OK in the ACBL; I've asked her to check with more experienced Directors.

So, the statement that in the ACBL "would be illegal to pass a hand that with the same shape but take away some honours would open" is simply false, unless my wife the inexperienced Director is badly mistaken.

That acbl restriction of not passing with hand of same shape but fewer points only applies to opening one level bids.

mikestar13, on 2019-October-13, 19:51, said:

acbl has always been braindead where pointcount is concerned. So if you open

AQxxx
AJxx
xx
xx

it becomes illegal to pass

Qxxxx
Qxxx
KQ
QJ

Carl

Stephen Tu, on 2019-October-14, 20:00, said:

I imagine you mean in the sense that a one level opening can be weaker than pass.
If so, that is equivalent to a clause of the WBF HUM definition which for many RAs means forbidden in most or all competitions.

mikestar13, on 2019-October-13, 19:51, said:

So if it is ok to open

AQxxx
AJxx
xx
xx

it becomes illegal to pass

Qxxxx
Qxxx
KQ
QJ

ridiculous!

mikestar13, on 2019-October-13, 19:51, said:

Yet the most recent Bulletin has an article by Larry Cohen on hand evaluation that explains that Work HCP undervalues ace and tens. They've also published articles saying that honors in long suits are more valuable, touching honors and tenaces are better than honors in different suits, etc.

I don't think that rule is intended to be precise to a single point or disallow judgement about suit quality.

1. Answering the original question, I don't know. It's a style thing that the opponents need to know about, but I'm not sure where you can (except when he game-forces your 3rd seat opener, and you're waiting for the opening lead, this tendency is discloseable and should be disclosed).

2. For those who complain about ACBL regulations, which is a game that has been enjoyed by thousands for over 40 years, it's a lot harder now. Because they've been very careful. But you also have to be very careful, and read the entire section. The Open(+) charts say, as far as disallowed:

Quote

The explanation (i.e., "that is") makes it clear: If you open AQxxx AJxx xx xx you can absolutely pass Qxxxx Qxxx KQ QJ - but you can't pass AQxxx AJxx xx Jx or AQJxx AJxx xx xx. And the examples provided also help:

Quote

I would always pass a 12-point 4-4-4-1, and possibly even with 13. Playing Acol with 12-14 NT, I cannot rebid my suit if partner responds in my singleton. With 14, I might risk NT. I'd welcome suggestions - this is my least-favourite hand shape.

bluenikki, on 2019-October-15, 07:32, said:

Repeating something doesn't make it true.

IIRC, the bidding charts were written that way to outlaw forcing pass systems where an opening pass is equivalent to a standard opening bid. You are welcome to use your judgement and pass a 12 HCP with the caveat that partner should not play you for a better hand if you pass than if you bid.

661_Pete, on 2019-October-15, 13:28, said:

Always pass 4-4-4-1 hands no matter how many points you have. The directors will thank you for keeping the game moving quickly.

hrothgar, on 2019-October-14, 14:44, said:

From first K-S book: no 1.5 quick tricks,no opening. 11.10 CCCC points. Kaplan would NOT open it as dealer.

For that matter, in early Roth-Stone, an opening required 2 defensive tricks, separately from the point count requirement.

bluenikki, on 2019-October-15, 16:09, said:

CCCC does not apply to balanced hands

661_Pete, on 2019-October-15, 13:28, said:

In my regular partnerships I have always played that 1♦ - 2♣; 2♦ is forcing for one round and may explicitly be only a 4 card suit. This obviously requires an alert. The more mainstream solution to this shape is to open 1♥ and rebid 2♦ over 2♣, meaning that this sequence does not promise 5 hearts.

Other 4441 shapes provide no difficulty in Acol - open 1=4=4=4 1♦, 4=4=1=4 1♣ and 4=1=4=4 with whichever minor suit you prefer. My preference with the 4=1=4=4 is the traditional suit-under-the-singleton 1♦, which makes life a little easier on the auction 1X - (1♠) - X - (P) but enough play up-the-line for the 1♣ opening to be a perfectly acceptable approach.

You'd look a bit silly when partner passes with a flat KKK or AKK and you miss a cold game.

Edit: this was in response to the 15-count hand Carl suggested should be passed. Somehow about 10 posts appeared in between.

ahydra