[f0rdy]

32519, on 2014-February-19, 11:44, said:

Standard bidders will open the auction with 1♦ and jump to 3♣ second time round to show these sorts of hand patterns and HCP held.

False. Standard bidders can split the range 11-22 into at least three sub-ranges (eg 1D - 1X - 2C - 2D - P, 1D - 1X - 2C - 2D - 3D, 1D - 1X - 3C)

Quote

So you end up at the same level in the same bid second time round anyway.

But having exchanged much more information.

Quote

However…
In the modern game, bidding is getting more and more aggressive. On iffish hands and favourable vulnerability, the opponent in the direct seat gets an opportunity to show a major suit on level-1. Every time he finds a fit with partner, pre-emptive jumps, cue-bid raises etc are all possible, jamming the auction before your side gets an opportunity to describe your hand pattern and HCP held effectively.

So…
If you still haven’t figured it out, by opening the bidding with (what is 25% of the time) an artificial 2♦ (the other 75% it is a natural 2♦), my side is gaining…
1. The whole of level-1 and 40% of level-2 has been taken away from the opponents.

False. 25-30% of level 2. They can't overcall 2D, but they can double, or pass then act to show marginal hands.

Quote

The player in the direct seat is less likely to enter the auction with an iffish hand. Often, that in itself gives an indication of the HCP spread.
2. In an uncontested auction, the bidding is forcing for one round.

False, at least according to your next paragraph.

Quote

Depending on the actual hand pattern and HCP held by responder, he gets an uncontested first round bid to best describe his hand. These could be any of the following –
a. Pass with a hand completely useless outside of a ♦ contract. If he does pass, the player sitting in the fourth seat is under tremendous pressure to balance without any other natural or obvious bid available. Through passing the opening bid in third seat, the player sitting fourth can be pretty darn sure that he is running into one of the strong hand patterns SITTING BEHIND HIM!! Not nice!
b. Bid your longest major first
c. Bid 2NT with 10-13 HCP, suit length and HCP concentrated in the minors
d. Bid 3♣ with a single suited hand in clubs
e. Bid 3♦ with 10-13 HCP, guaranteed support for a 6-card major, as game invitational
f. Bid to the appropriate level with any single suited hand that is useless outside of the suit bid
g. Bid 3NT with 14-15 HCP, suit length and HCP concentrated in the minors
All these types of bids are saying something about your hand

Well done. Making bids in a constructive auction which say nothing about your hand is only rarely a good idea...

Quote

and govern how the auction will continue depending on the actual hand pattern opened.
3. 6-4 holdings in the majors, 10-15 HCP are rare. 4441 holdings with 16+ HCP are rare. 5-5 holdings in the minors, 14-21 HCP are rare. Natural weak-two’s in ♦ are more frequent. By lumping them all into one bid allows my side to reveal them all adequately in the continuation bidding, having taken away the whole of level-1 and 40% of level-2 from the opponents. I rate that as a big plus.
4. The defence to the bid will be heavily focused towards a natural weak-two ♦ suit having been opened. Never underestimate the annoying factor of a natural weak 2, annoying to the opponents, that is. These forums have plenty of actual hands where someone was faced with an awkward bid after a 2♦ opening.
5. After a takeout double in the direct seat, partner is no longer under any obligation to enter the auction. He may well be sitting with real values opposite a natural weak 2♦ waiting to see how the auction develops before extracting a juicy penalty double for our side?

... exactly as opposite a natural weak 2?

Quote

6. The bid has ♦ as the anchor suit, and should therefore pass brown sticker regulations with flying colours. Even in the ACBL it should be declared legal. Compare that to all the ACBL fuss around the Multi!

A lie, or a fundamental misunderstanding of pretty much all system regulations (and the phrase "anchor suit")? I haven't been following this very carefully, so I don't know whether anyone has yet come up with a jurisdiction in which it would be legal to play this convention? (Slightly obscurely, if the minor two-suiters were 15+, and the weak option were single-suited clubs rather than single-suited diamonds, this would be legal in the EBU)

Quote

The number of gains my side is going to achieve because of all the above, is going to outweigh your 1-in-6 ratio by a considerable margin.

[Vampyr]

f0rdy, on 2014-February-19, 12:18, said:

A lie, or a fundamental misunderstanding of pretty much all system regulations (and the phrase "anchor suit")?

FYI for original poster -- an "anchor suit" is a suit that is present in all possible hand types.

[manudude03]

32519, on 2014-February-19, 11:44, said:

Standard bidders will open the auction with 1♦ and jump to 3♣ second time round to show these sorts of hand patterns and HCP held. So you end up at the same level in the same bid second time round anyway.

However…
In the modern game, bidding is getting more and more aggressive. On iffish hands and favourable vulnerability, the opponent in the direct seat gets an opportunity to show a major suit on level-1. Every time he finds a fit with partner, pre-emptive jumps, cue-bid raises etc are all possible, jamming the auction before your side gets an opportunity to describe your hand pattern and HCP held effectively.

So…
If you still haven’t figured it out, by opening the bidding with (what is 25% of the time) an artificial 2♦ (the other 75% it is a natural 2♦), my side is gaining…
1. The whole of level-1 and 40% of level-2 has been taken away from the opponents. The player in the direct seat is less likely to enter the auction with an iffish hand. Often, that in itself gives an indication of the HCP spread.
2. In an uncontested auction, the bidding is forcing for one round. Depending on the actual hand pattern and HCP held by responder, he gets an uncontested first round bid to best describe his hand. These could be any of the following –
a. Pass with a hand completely useless outside of a ♦ contract. If he does pass, the player sitting in the fourth seat is under tremendous pressure to balance without any other natural or obvious bid available. Through passing the opening bid in third seat, the player sitting fourth can be pretty darn sure that he is running into one of the strong hand patterns SITTING BEHIND HIM!! Not nice!
b. Bid your longest major first
c. Bid 2NT with 10-13 HCP, suit length and HCP concentrated in the minors
d. Bid 3♣ with a single suited hand in clubs
e. Bid 3♦ with 10-13 HCP, guaranteed support for a 6-card major, as game invitational
f. Bid to the appropriate level with any single suited hand that is useless outside of the suit bid
g. Bid 3NT with 14-15 HCP, suit length and HCP concentrated in the minors
All these types of bids are saying something about your hand and govern how the auction will continue depending on the actual hand pattern opened.
3. 6-4 holdings in the majors, 10-15 HCP are rare. 4441 holdings with 16+ HCP are rare. 5-5 holdings in the minors, 14-21 HCP are rare. Natural weak-two’s in ♦ are more frequent. By lumping them all into one bid allows my side to reveal them all adequately in the continuation bidding, having taken away the whole of level-1 and 40% of level-2 from the opponents. I rate that as a big plus.
4. The defence to the bid will be heavily focused towards a natural weak-two ♦ suit having been opened. Never underestimate the annoying factor of a natural weak 2, annoying to the opponents, that is. These forums have plenty of actual hands where someone was faced with an awkward bid after a 2♦ opening.
5. After a takeout double in the direct seat, partner is no longer under any obligation to enter the auction. He may well be sitting with real values opposite a natural weak 2♦ waiting to see how the auction develops before extracting a juicy penalty double for our side?
6. The bid has ♦ as the anchor suit, and should therefore pass brown sticker regulations with flying colours. Even in the ACBL it should be declared legal. Compare that to all the ACBL fuss around the Multi!

The number of gains my side is going to achieve because of all the above, is going to outweigh your 1-in-6 ratio by a considerable margin.

First of all, in standard bidding, 1D-1M-3C is GF, so your weaker minor hands are a level higher with less information. As for your points:

1. About consuming space, you lose a lot of the effect by using a forcing opening. A NF opening does put a lot of pressure on the opposition, but a forcing opening relieves the pressure on the opponents by about a full level. So your 2D opening is really only about the same pressure as a standard 1D opener.

2a) 4th seat is really not under a lot of pressure at all, they will have seen partner pass, and will likely have an easy bid or pass. A simple takeout double will solve itself out, and the opponents are in familiar territory, and in fact, the pressure is reversed as now opener sitting with a 6-4 major hand has to decide whether to rescue partner or bid their 6 card major and risk playing in a 6-0 fit doubled.

b) At this point, the defense should be effectively defending as if against a good weak 2, this can be mildly annoying, but the opposition should be ok most of the time, especially knowing that opener will bid again without length in the major.

c) The defense can pretty much just always pass here, knowing that they will always get another chance to bid if opener has minors, and they are in a misfit with the majors and the majority of the points.

d) I suspect you won't be able to untangle where you belong well enough, this will turn very random, I do concede that defending this development will be difficult if 2nd seat has passed. If 2nd seat has acted though, it becomes about the same. Bear in mind, that it is very unlikely the opponents will play in openers 6 card suit.

e) Here, you are losing any time opener does not have both majors, since you have no way to bid constructively to decide whether or not 3NT is a good idea, something quite important when the alternative is the minors. However the simple defense of X being a takeout of diamonds just turns the auction into defending against 2D-3D, with a little less focus on game.

f) The problem here is you have no idea what the appropriate level is, not does it make it any harder for the defense.

g) So, does opener pull with the majors? How do you bid Jxxx AKJxxx Qx x opposite x Qxx AJTxx AKxx? 6H isn't a terrible contract (better than the slams you've posted in this thread), and 3NT could be down the first 5 spade tricks. If opener pulls, then partner could have the same hand with the minors reversed and 4H will need some luck to make, not to mention it could easily get doubled.

3. 6-4 in the majors isn't that rare when compared to a weak 2 in diamonds, yes it's more rare, but only by about 4x the amount. You are also losing against those who just play a weak 2 in diamonds since the opponents in the vast majority of cases will get 2 chances to act, which can lead to some pretty interesting sequences, some of which would never have been available if 2D is usually passed.

4. A non-forcing weak 2 is annoying, a forcing one isn't. There is a reason playing transfer pre-empts is generally a bad idea. Like transfer pre-empts it will probably be a decent idea against muppets, but against good opposition you will just get taken to the cleaners. If you assume opener has a weak 2, and you have the nightmare 2425 hand with opening values, you are stuck against a normal weak 2 in diamonds, but against your opening, they can simply pass and the most likely continuation by far will be 2D-P-2S-P-3D, now it is a lot safer to come in knowing that the odds that partner has spades has decreased.

5. And this is different from any other opening bid because.....? In fact, you may even be worse off if it goes say 2D-X-P-3S, opener can't really double or bid 4H with 6H4S, and so you are at a completely blind guess.

6. It's not the diamonds option that makes it a BSC, or the majors option for that matter, but both together make it a BSC, since if having a weak hand of any nature is possible, then whatever non-weak options you have must promise a strong hand (13+ HCP by the WBF description). When it comes to the ACBL, you would have to ask them, since they have some pretty fickle regulations. I seem to remember reading on the forums once that 2H Ekrens (weak with both majors) was allowed (maybe it was only at midchart), but 2D showing the same thing wasn't, despite the almost universal opinion that the former is a lot harder to defend against. However, the ACBL's rule of thumb is a convention is barred unless it is specifically allowed, so at least until you ask for a formal ruling on this, you wouldn't be able to.

[hrothgar]

One other critique that hasn't been brought up:

If the 2♦ opening is weak with Diamonds,

1. Opener is forced to the three level
2. Opener is following a slow, circuitous route to get there

I would expect the incidence of a standard weak 2D opening should be significantly higher than the frequency with which one can safely show Diamonds with the Lee 2D opening.

[f0rdy]

hrothgar, on 2014-February-19, 14:28, said:

One other critique that hasn't been brought up:

If the 2♦ opening is weak with Diamonds,

1. Opener is forced to the three level
2. Opener is following a slow, circuitous route to get there

I would expect the incidence of a standard weak 2D opening should be significantly higher than the frequency with which one can safely show Diamonds with the Lee 2D opening.

... and actually, because of your point 2, you need a better diamond suit to safely open a Lee 2D than a natural 3D. Defenders have several more calls available to decide whether to play or defend. Same reason 2N = weak minors needs a better hand than 3C = weak minors.

[32519]

32519 said:
Standard bidders will open the auction with 1♦ and jump to 3♣ second time round to show these sorts of hand patterns and HCP held. So you end up at the same level in the same bid second time round anyway.
Manudude said:
First of all, in standard bidding, 1D-1M-3C is GF, so your weaker minor hands are a level higher with less information.
32519 answered:
With weaker minor suit hands, the auction will proceed 1D-1M-2C (not 3C). With 5/5 and 14+ HCP in the minors, my first choice would be to play in either suit if a fit can be found. If partner has appropriate values, but they are concentrated in the majors, the most likely contract is 3NT, your GF stipulation.

However…
In the modern game, bidding is getting more and more aggressive. On iffish hands and favourable vulnerability, the opponent in the direct seat gets an opportunity to show a major suit on level-1. Every time he finds a fit with partner, pre-emptive jumps, cue-bid raises etc are all possible, jamming the auction before your side gets an opportunity to describe your hand pattern and HCP held effectively.

So…
If you still haven’t figured it out, by opening the bidding with (what is 25% of the time) an artificial 2♦ (the other 75% it is a natural 2♦), my side is gaining…

Manudude said:
As for your points:

32519 said:
1. The whole of level-1 and 40% of level-2 has been taken away from the opponents. The player in the direct seat is less likely to enter the auction with an iffish hand. Often, that in itself gives an indication of the HCP spread.
Manudude said:
1. About consuming space, you lose a lot of the effect by using a forcing opening. A NF opening does put a lot of pressure on the opposition, but a forcing opening relieves the pressure on the opponents by about a full level. So your 2D opening is really only about the same pressure as a standard 1D opener.
32519 answered:
We’ve covered this before higher up in the thread. The auction has proceeded 2D-(P)-Whatever-(P)
3D (75% of the time). Now your side has lost another level of bidding space. How do you intend entering the auction now? If both opponents are passing, partner probably has enough values in the three remaining suits to bring the contract home. If it fails by one, being 1-level higher than standard bidders, I am looking at minus 50 or minus 100 depending on the vulnerability, versus minus 110 when the opponents can bid and make 2M.
This I will concede to you: Playing standard, I lose a natural raise of the pre-empt whenever the auction would have proceeded 2D-(P)-3D, as the 3D bid here has a different meaning, i.e. game invitational in a 6-card major promising 10-13 HCP. But I get it back via both auctions outlined above, in the first by returning to 3D, in the second by passing the 3D game invitational bid. I figure I’m still ahead here in the auction.

2. In an uncontested auction, the bidding is forcing for one round. Depending on the actual hand pattern and HCP held by responder, he gets an uncontested first round bid to best describe his hand. These could be any of the following –

32519 said:
a. Pass with a hand completely useless outside of a ♦ contract. If he does pass, the player sitting in the fourth seat is under tremendous pressure to balance without any other natural or obvious bid available. Through passing the opening bid in third seat, the player sitting fourth can be pretty darn sure that he is running into one of the strong hand patterns SITTING BEHIND HIM!! Not nice!
Manudude said:
2a) 4th seat is really not under a lot of pressure at all, they will have seen partner pass, and will likely have an easy bid or pass. A simple takeout double will solve itself out, and the opponents are in familiar territory, and in fact, the pressure is reversed as now opener sitting with a 6-4 major hand has to decide whether to rescue partner or bid their 6 card major and risk playing in a 6-0 fit doubled.
32519 answered:
I strongly disagree with this. There is no way that opener will run to a 6-card major. In passing the opening bid, partner has already shown a hand useless outside of diamonds, whereas opener’s hand has trick taking potential in whatever strong hand option was opened. Taking the winners from hand and trumping the losers in dummy can easily see your side doubling our side in a contract making overtricks. Not a good result for your side. Sitting the takeout double INCREASES the pressure on the player in second seat. If he chooses my 6-card major your side is in big trouble. Funnily enough, the safest place to run to is 3C as the 5/5 hand pattern in the minors is the one with the lowest frequency of occurrence. But now you are another level higher and in jeopardy of bringing your contract home. I rate that as a gain for my side.

32519 said:
b. Bid your longest major first
Manudude said:
b) At this point, the defense should be effectively defending as if against a good weak 2, this can be mildly annoying, but the opposition should be ok most of the time, especially knowing that opener will bid again without length in the major.
32519 answered:
OK, so we agree on something. My side gains here.

32519 said:
c. Bid 2NT with 10-13 HCP, suit length and HCP concentrated in the minors
Manudude said:
c) The defense can pretty much just always pass here, knowing that they will always get another chance to bid if opener has minors, and they are in a misfit with the majors and the majority of the points.
32519 answered:
I stongly disagree with this as well. With the 6-4 hand pattern and 10-13 HCP, the 2NT bid will probably get passed. My side has a misfit with communication problems between the two hands. Your side entering the bidding now will actually RESCUE my side from the misfit. My side has the majority of the HCP and will more often than not play your side down in whatever contract you end up in. Whenever my side has a misfit here, increases your sides chances of getting the plus. Doubling will be outright dangerous as you could easily be doubling my side into game. If the big 5/5 hand pattern was opened, slam in either minor on a double fit is possible. If the big 4441 hand pattern was opened, slam in the 4-card minor suit fit is possible. On the last two, your side can save in the majors, but my side still gets the plus score. When a natural weak 2D was opened, a signoff in 5D will severely hamper your side from entering the auction.

32519 said:
d. Bid 3♣ with a single suited hand in clubs
Manudude said:
d) I suspect you won't be able to untangle where you belong well enough, this will turn very random, I do concede that defending this development will be difficult if 2nd seat has passed. If 2nd seat has acted though, it becomes about the same. Bear in mind, that it is very unlikely the opponents will play in openers 6 card suit.
32519 answered:
I disagree with you yet again. Bidding 3C conveys (almost) the same message as passing the 2D opening bid. You have a single suited hand useless outside of clubs. By far the majority of these sorts of responses will be passed for the same reasons as set out in point 2(a) above. On vary rare occasions, opener will have the 4441 hand with a fit in clubs. Signing off in 5C is a no-brainer when that happens.

32519 said:
e. Bid 3♦ with 10-13 HCP, guaranteed support for a 6-card major, as game invitational
Manudude said:
e) Here, you are losing any time opener does not have both majors, since you have no way to bid constructively to decide whether or not 3NT is a good idea, something quite important when the alternative is the minors. However the simple defense of X being a takeout of diamonds just turns the auction into defending against 2D-3D, with a little less focus on game.
32519 answered:
Wrong again! Over 3D, 3NT shows the 4441 hand. Over 3D, 4C shows the big 5/5 hand in the minors. On both auctions you are still well placed to find the optimal game or partscore contract, depending on the degree of fit with responder.

32519 said:
f. Bid to the appropriate level with any single suited hand that is useless outside of the suit bid
Manudude said:
f) The problem here is you have no idea what the appropriate level is, not does it make it any harder for the defense.
32519 answered:
Wrong again! It is no different to any standard pre-empt, 7-cards on level-3, 8-cards on level-4, 9-cards on level-5; all with minimum values.

32519 said:
g. Bid 3NT with 14-15 HCP, suit length and HCP concentrated in the minors
Manudude said:
g) So, does opener pull with the majors? How do you bid Jxxx AKJxxx Qx x opposite x Qxx AJTxx AKxx? 6H isn't a terrible contract (better than the slams you've posted in this thread), and 3NT could be down the first 5 spade tricks. If opener pulls, then partner could have the same hand with the minors reversed and 4H will need some luck to make, not to mention it could easily get doubled.
32519 answered:
Refer to point 2(e) above, it’s the same argument. You have a misfit but combined game values. 3NT is probably your best shot most of the time. Some will fail, but standard bidders are going to fail as well. No gain or los for either side in a teams match.

All these types of bids are saying something about your hand and govern how the auction will continue depending on the actual hand pattern opened.

32519 said:
2. 6-4 holdings in the majors, 10-15 HCP are rare. 4441 holdings with 16+ HCP are rare. 5-5 holdings in the minors, 14-21 HCP are rare. Natural weak-two’s in ♦ are more frequent. By lumping them all into one bid allows my side to reveal them all adequately in the continuation bidding, having taken away the whole of level-1 and 40% of level-2 from the opponents. I rate that as a big plus.
Manudude said:
2. 6-4 in the majors isn't that rare when compared to a weak 2 in diamonds, yes it's more rare, but only by about 4x the amount. You are also losing against those who just play a weak 2 in diamonds since the opponents in the vast majority of cases will get 2 chances to act, which can lead to some pretty interesting sequences, some of which would never have been available if 2D is usually passed.
32519 answered:
Nah! Multi purpose bids are part of the modern game. Why do others play Multi or Muiderberg or Lucas Two’s or whatever? To waste the 2D bid exclusively on the 4441 hand pattern for example, is just a bad idea. The frequency of occurrence is simply too low to justify that. Same goes for the other two strong hand patterns.

32519 said:
4. The defence to the bid will be heavily focused towards a natural weak-two ♦ suit having been opened. Never underestimate the annoying factor of a natural weak 2, annoying to the opponents, that is. These forums have plenty of actual hands where someone was faced with an awkward bid after a 2♦ opening.
Manudude said:
4. A non-forcing weak 2 is annoying, a forcing one isn't. There is a reason playing transfer pre-empts is generally a bad idea. Like transfer pre-empts it will probably be a decent idea against muppets, but against good opposition you will just get taken to the cleaners. If you assume opener has a weak 2, and you have the nightmare 2425 hand with opening values, you are stuck against a normal weak 2 in diamonds, but against your opening, they can simply pass and the most likely continuation by far will be 2D-P-2S-P-3D, now it is a lot safer to come in knowing that the odds that partner has spades has decreased.
32519 answered:
Nah! Look at your auction. You have no idea of the hand strength of the player sitting in third seat. The fact that the player sitting fourth did nothing first time round must surely be an indicator that he is weak. Now you have made a takeout double for the two unbid suits on level-3. A reckon the win/loss ratio here is 50/50 depending on the actual hand strength of the player in third seat.

32519 said:
5. After a takeout double in the direct seat, partner is no longer under any obligation to enter the auction. He may well be sitting with real values opposite a natural weak 2♦ waiting to see how the auction develops before extracting a juicy penalty double for our side?
Manudude said:
5. And this is different from any other opening bid because.....? In fact, you may even be worse off if it goes say 2D-X-P-3S, opener can't really double or bid 4H with 6H4S, and so you are at a completely blind guess.
32519 answered:
There is no difference. Playing standard or utilising the artificial 2D opening places both options on equal footing after a takeout double in the direct seat.

32519 said:
6. The bid has ♦ as the anchor suit, and should therefore pass brown sticker regulations with flying colours. Even in the ACBL it should be declared legal. Compare that to all the ACBL fuss around the Multi!
Manudude said:
6. It's not the diamonds option that makes it a BSC, or the majors option for that matter, but both together make it a BSC, since if having a weak hand of any nature is possible, then whatever non-weak options you have must promise a strong hand (13+ HCP by the WBF description). When it comes to the ACBL, you would have to ask them, since they have some pretty fickle regulations. I seem to remember reading on the forums once that 2H Ekrens (weak with both majors) was allowed (maybe it was only at midchart), but 2D showing the same thing wasn't, despite the almost universal opinion that the former is a lot harder to defend against. However, the ACBL's rule of thumb is a convention is barred unless it is specifically allowed, so at least until you ask for a formal ruling on this, you wouldn't be able to.
32519 answered:
OK, if need be, I’ll follow the same route that Multi went. Terence Reece fought hard for a special ruling to have the Multi exempted as a BSC. That may be necessary here every time it lands up before an appeals committee.

The number of gains my side is going to achieve because of all the above, is going to outweigh your 1-in-6 ratio by a considerable margin.

[the hog]

Yawn!

[Lord Molyb]

Well, I have finally found a poster on here that is more crazy than I am. Excellent.

[RunemPard]

Play whatever you want...but the fact that you ignore so many respected and talented posters day after day after day is just insane. Are you posting your ideas to get help and input, or do you just want to prove something?

P.S. If you really want to show-off these methods...please get your club partner to play the forums vs. JEC. I will be watching!

[Zelandakh]

32519, on 2014-February-19, 11:44, said:

Standard bidders will open the auction with 1♦ and jump to 3♣ second time round to show these sorts of hand patterns and HCP held. So you end up at the same level in the same bid second time round anyway.

You cannot see the difference between showing 14-21 and 18+-21 at the 3 level? Nevermind then. You could usefully extend this concept to opening all balanced 18-24hcp hands 2NT.

[manudude03]

I'm not going to quote a big wall of text, but if anyone asked me for a defense to your opening, I would not be recommending X as takeout of diamonds. For what it's worth, against multi, I usually play X as 12-15 balanced or a hand too strong to overcall (and inappropriate for a jump overcall), with lebensohl style responses, with everything else natural. I can imagine the same defense being quite effective here.

[32519]

RunemPard, on 2014-February-19, 21:39, said:

Play whatever you want...but the fact that you ignore so many respected and talented posters day after day after day is just insane.

Every constructive post is seriously considered (see below). The posts that are ignored are the ones that choose to ridicule without having a full knowledge or understanding of the bid.

RunemPard, on 2014-February-19, 21:39, said:

Are you posting your ideas to get help and input, or do you just want to prove something?

Yes, to get help and input, not to prove anything. Every constructive post and suggestion is carefully considered to determine if it can –
1. Improve on the continuation bidding structure
Regarding this, Zel made a suggestion in post 123 and in post 127 on how to improve the continuation bidding structure for the 4441 hand pattern. In post 129 I adopted Zel’s suggestion, discarding my original idea, as it fits in better and leads to a more meaningful auction.
2. As another example, every post that Manudude03 has made, was carefully measured up against the continuation bidding structure as it is currently designed, to determine –
a. If it has already been addressed
b. If it can be addressed better (as Zel’s suggestion did)
c. If it has exposed a hole that needs to be addressed

In some of those replies to Manudude03, losses in certain areas were conceded. But that is to be expected with multi purpose bids, just as the current Multi has its own list of pros and cons. The players who have Multi in their system agreements have all (hopefully) weighed up the pros and cons, and decided that the pros outweigh the cons. That is what I am trying to do with this bid of mine.

When Multi first appeared on the scene, early proponents of it were getting a disproportionate number of good results as their opponents did not have an effective defence against it. That is now happening with me; few have heard about the bid, seen it, or encountered it at the table. Just as with the Multi, good defences were developed to counter it, the same is going to happen here.

If you or anyone else can assist me with the following, it will be greatly appreciated.

Never before have I taken any ruling to an Appeals Committee, so I have absolutely no idea of the procedure or what is involved in doing so. I want to be prepared for when it happens, when this bid of mine lands up before an Appeals Committee.
1. How do these committees function?
2. What sort of documentation do I need to take along in defence of the bid? Terence Reece fought long and hard to have the Multi legalised. Don’t know if that will be needed here as well.
3. Anything constructive about these committees that I need to know in preparation for when the fight (may) start(s).

Thanks again.

[hrothgar]

32519, on 2014-February-20, 08:17, said:

Never before have I taken any ruling to an Appeals Committee, so I have absolutely no idea of the procedure or what is involved in doing so. I want to be prepared for when it happens, when this bid of mine lands up before an Appeals Committee.
1. How do these committees function?
2. What sort of documentation do I need to take along in defence of the bid? Terence Reece fought long and hard to have the Multi legalised. Don’t know if that will be needed here as well.
3. Anything constructive about these committees that I need to know in preparation for when the fight (may) start(s).

Just to be clear: Appeals committees deal with rules violations during games. Their job is to interpret existing laws, not to change them.

As a practical example, let's assume that you were playing in a tournament.
Someone made a lead out of turn. The director is charged with issuing a (reasonably) immediate ruling.
If you disagreed with the director's ruling, you would then submit the hand to an appeals committee that would be able to overturn the director's decision.

If you want to play your convention at an event, you need to get permission from whatever body is sponsoring the game.

For a local club game, this might be the owner's of the club.
For a game that is run under the auspices of the South African bridge Union, this would be their equivalent of the conventions committee.
For a World Championship, this would be the WBF.

In an ideal world, each of these bodies would have a written set of regulations that you could use to determine in advance whether or not your convention is legal.

As people pointed out earlier in the thread, the bid is clearly not sanctioned for use in the ACBL at either the GCC or the Superchart Level.
Nor can you play it in WBF events.

I have no idea about the system regulations in your local club, other than the fact that you claim to be playing this convention.
Nor do I know the regulations in South Africa as a whole.

[Vampyr]

32519, on 2014-February-20, 08:17, said:

Never before have I taken any ruling to an Appeals Committee, so I have absolutely no idea of the procedure or what is involved in doing so. I want to be prepared for when it happens, when this bid of mine lands up before an Appeals Committee.
1. How do these committees function?
2. What sort of documentation do I need to take along in defence of the bid? Terence Reece fought long and hard to have the Multi legalised. Don’t know if that will be needed here as well.
3. Anything constructive about these committees that I need to know in preparation for when the fight (may) start(s).

I can't imagine why you would want to appeal a ruling based on the legality of a convention; the original director will no doubt have access to a copy of the regulations in force. An appeals committee would rule based on these same regulations, so unless the latter are really ambiguously written, you are going to lose your deposit.

[Trinidad]

32519, on 2014-February-20, 08:17, said:

Never before have I taken any ruling to an Appeals Committee, so I have absolutely no idea of the procedure or what is involved in doing so. I want to be prepared for when it happens, when this bid of mine lands up before an Appeals Committee.
1. How do these committees function?
2. What sort of documentation do I need to take along in defence of the bid? Terence Reece fought long and hard to have the Multi legalised. Don’t know if that will be needed here as well.
3. Anything constructive about these committees that I need to know in preparation for when the fight (may) start(s).

Thanks again.

Hrothgar has written a nice reply already, but I will be a little more specific then he is and predict the following sequence of events.

• You use your convention (having it as part of your system is enough to use it)
  
• An opponent calls the TD for you having this convention
  
• The TD will look in the regulations. He will find the ones that gwnn quoted and will conclude that your convention is illegal.
  
• The TD will probably forbid you to use this convention, give you a procedural penalty for starting the session with it and he might impose other restrictions on your system (e.g. playing "Standard South African" for the rest of the session).
  
• You will have to follow the TD's decision.
  
• Afterwards, you can ask for an appeals committee (AC). The function of the AC is to see whether the TD has ruled correctly. Often, but not always, you will have to pay a deposit before you appeal. This is intended to prevent people from wasting everybody's time. If the AC deems that there was a good reason to appeal, they will give you your deposit back (even if you don't win the appeal). If they deem that the appeal was a waste of time, they will keep the deposit.
  
• The AC hears your arguments why the TD's ruling was wrong. The problem is that you don't have any arguments. The regulations are clear: The Lee 2♦ is not allowed, whether you like it or not.
  
• The AC will decide that the TD ruled correctly. They will also decide that your appeal doesn't have merit and was a waste of time. They will keep the money. They may impose a harsher penalty than the TD decided on.

FWIW, the way I see it, you seem to be knowingly breaking the rules of the game by playing your convention after gwnn pointed out to you that it is illegal according to the regulations of the South African Bridge League (that also govern the play at your club).

Rules are broken all the time. Bridge is a difficult game. Everybody has revoked or lead out of turn and everybody has subconsciously used UI. But few people consciously break the rules just because they stubbornly think the rules should be different.

This means that if I would be serving on your AC, not only would I rule against you and keep the deposit. I would refer the case to the South African ethics committee or equivalent. The outcome of this might be that you get suspended from playing.

There is one flaw in my prediction of the future: Your opponents may decide to refrain from calling the TD, since they score too many points against the Lee 2♦.

Rik

[Vampyr]

Trinidad, on 2014-February-20, 09:05, said:

the regulations of the South African Bridge League (that also govern the play at your club).

This is not clear. Clubs in SA might have the right to establish their own policies wrt systems.

[Trinidad]

Vampyr, on 2014-February-20, 09:12, said:

This is not clear. Clubs in SA might have the right to establish their own policies wrt systems.

As we can read in gwnn's post #70 clubs can establish their own systems policies, under the condition that they are more restrictive.

So, if it isn't allowed in the SA BL it cannot be allowed in the club. If it is allowed in the SA BL, it might still be disallowed at the club.

Rik

[Vampyr]

Trinidad, on 2014-February-20, 10:12, said:

As we can read in gwnn's post #70 clubs can establish their own systems policies, under the condition that they are more restrictive.

So, if it isn't allowed in the SA BL it cannot be allowed in the club. If it is allowed in the SA BL, it might still be disallowed at the club.

Rik

The quote does not seem to preclude the possibility of clubs being less restrictive.

[Trinidad]

Vampyr, on 2014-February-20, 10:17, said:

The quote does not seem to preclude the possibility of clubs being less restrictive.

Technically, you are correct about that. (Though the text of the quote would seem strange if clubs would be allowed to have less restrictive regulations.)

Therefore, I looked up the regulation myself. It starts out with:

Quote

The purpose of these regulations is to create uniformity in the definition of bids and acceptability of conventions throughout the bodies under the jurisdiction of the South African Bridge Federation and at tournaments run by such bodies. These regulations are promulgated under the authority awarded to Sponsoring Organisations in terms of Law 40 and Law 80 of the Laws of Duplicate Bridge.
During any tournament, these regulations shall be applied by the Tournament Director and in appeals being considered by an Appeals Committee.

(Emphasis is mine)

A little further down, we find the following:

Quote

DISALLOWED BIDS AND BIDDING METHODS
The following bids or methods are disallowed and are subject to adjusted scores and/or penalties:
[]
Highly Unusual Methods (HUM) and Brown Sticker systems, as defined by the World Bridge Federation, except where specifically allowed in Category A events. See page 10;

And on page 10 we see that a club does not have the power to classify their club night as a Category A event:

Quote

Category A events
Quarter-final, semi-final and finals of team's events at regional and national level, where not fewer than 28 boards are played per session (unless screens are in use when boards may be 24) or any event specifically designated as a CATEGORY A event by the Executive of the S.A.B.F. Any OTHER event is a CATEGORY B event.

So, unless the Executive of the SABF has specifically classified the club night for 32519's bridge club as a Category A event (unlikely) or 32519's club does not fall under the jurisdiction of the SABF (what do I know?), I would conclude that 32519 is not allowed to play the Lee 2♦ at his club.

But if 32519 is going to play it anyway and appeal a TD's decision, who am I to stop him?

Rik

[Vampyr]

I am surprised than an NBO prohibits clubs from adopting more relaxed system regulations. Where besides at clubs can new things be tried?