HUM or not?

[awm]

I agree with Trinidad's definition. The idea is that given two hands with the same distribution, if we would pass the stronger one and open (one-level) on the weaker one, then it's HUM.

 

For example, suppose we play that a 1NT opening is either 8-9 hcp or 15-16 hcp, balanced. Hands with 12-14 hcp balanced open one of a suit. Hands with 10-11 hcp balanced PASS. Otherwise our openings are fairly standard.

 

This does not fit any of the other HUM definitions -- pass doesn't show the values commonly accepted for a bid of one, 8 hcp hands are not a king or more below average strength, and all our openings are natural.

 

Yet it is the case that there are hands we would open 1NT (balanced 8-count) but replace a small card with a king in the same suit and the hand becomes a pass. So this would be a HUM.

 

When two hands have wildly different distribution, it's really a matter of judgment which is the "weaker one" and you can find many cases in very standard systems where a hand with one distribution opens and an (arguably) stronger hand with a different distribution passes. I don't think this should be considered HUM. I don't think Cascade's system is HUM.

[bluejak]

You can play Lorenzo (pass=8-11, with 0-7 you have to preempt, even on a 4-card), although that isn't allowed under EBU regulations (level 4).

To compensate you can play my 1♠ opening at Level 4, and that is indeed a HUM! B)

[jallerton]

11 C 10 Minimum opening bid strength in third and fourth seat

The minimum agreement for opening one of a suit is 8 HCP.

 

11 C 17 Other permitted agreements

Stevenson 1♠

This shows a hand with Clubs or Diamonds the longest suit.

 

So is it permitted at EBU Level 4 for a partnership to agree to open 1♠ in 3rd position on all of the following hands?

 

♠Q32 ♥Q32 ♦Q32 ♣Q432

♠Q32 ♥Q32 ♦Q432 ♣Q32

♠Q ♥Q432 ♦Q5432 ♣Q32

♠Q5432 ♥Q ♦Q ♣Q65432

♠none ♥QJ432 ♦QJ ♣Q65432

♠QJ432 ♥none ♦Q65432 ♣QJ

 

If so, it this permitted because Opener is deemed to be bidding constructively, or because a pre-emptive opening bid which can have 0,1,2,3,4 or 5 cards in any of the 4 suits is deemed to be easy to defend against?

 

By contrast, as I understand it, a partnership is not permitted to agree to open a natural 1♠ on:

 

♠A1098765 ♥K109876 ♦ none ♣ none