Licensing Regs: Testing the line

[wank]

Does anyone with time to burn and a destructive streak want to play around with this? I'm looking for a suitable opening structure within these parameters.

 

English licensing laws are much more permissive than American ones, but from what I hear much less permissive than Australian ones. If anyone au fait with the orange book thinks I've misinterpreted the regulations please tell me. In particular with regard to level 4 1 of a suit opening bid strength (i.e. as I read it, the rule of 18 requirement is dropped for level 4 if the appropriate suit requirements are met.)

 

I would like to develop a system which is reasonably close to being illegal, without crossing the line. It would be nice to maximise theoretical merit within the framework. I'm not wanting to do this just to annoy the little old ladies BTW. I would like to try a forcing pass system or something equally exotic in a real tournament (i.e. not on BBO) and I'm not inclined to goto Australia to do it.

 

I was thinking of a forcing pass and a 1C multi opening which is predominantly weak, as these are the bids which are most flexible. I'm not attached to this - it's just what came to mind.

 

The relevant regulations are as follows:-

 

1 openers can be any strength if they promise 4+ cards in a known suit

 

1 club doesn't need a known suit, if it doesn't include unbalanced hands with 5+ of a major (unless with a minor of equal+ length). You are permitted to play a multi 1C such that it may contain the major based hands when strong, i.e. 16+.

 

Pass can't promise values. In reality this means, it can have any meaning which includes some 0 point hands. By the letter of the regulations I could play pass as 0 points with 9 clubs or x+ and just assume i'll lose a lot of points if i ever get dealt 9 clubs to the 10 and a 0 count, but this would be blatantly unsporting. I would prefer to play something that included a few more hands. I was thinking something simple like 1M openers are nat 8-15 and pass is 0-7 with 5+M or any 16+ which would fit with the 1C regulations by taking all the major based unbal hands away.

 

1NT can be natural (9+) or anything showing a known suit and what most people consider opening values, i.e. rule of 18.

 

2 level bids can be anything that either promises or denies the suit opened or which promises 4+ cards in a a known suit. i don't really mean denies the suit - it's just hard to phrase it. i'll give you an example, i play 2C as a weak 2 in D/H/S but it's permissible to have any side suit, even clubs, as long as it may also be a single suiter. on the other hand, you couldn't play 2C as any 2-suiter.

 

Responses are a free-for-all.

[gordontd]

I would like to try a forcing pass system or something equally exotic in a real tournament (i.e. not on BBO) and I'm not inclined to goto Australia to do it.

I'm not sure if it would meet your definition of a real tournament, but it might be of interest to you to know that at the Young Chelsea we run our Championship Pairs games on the last Thursday of each month in which there are no bidding system restrictions. Most players don't seem to take much advantage of this (they did more when we first started it a few years ago), but you would be welcome to come and play a FP system there, with adequate documentation and a suitable defence. Further information is available at http://www.ycbc.co.uk/Disclosure.pdf

[cloa513]

I think it not so much needing to have defence but rather having to read many pages to understand the system-　who needs to do bridge degree to play bridge. I`d say 5 A4 pages of abbreviated opening bids including general description of bidding continuations with some desription outside the standard bidding style if need be. If you do use some very unusual and awkward bids (like forcing opening pass) you flag that well before the tournament and opponents can pick their own defence.

 

People do have life outside of bridge so they shouldn`t need to read hundreds of page to play it.

[CamHenry]

Does anyone with time to burn and a destructive streak want to play around with this? I'm looking for a suitable opening structure within these (EBU) parameters.

Good morning! Matt Johnson and I play this: http://matthew.ath.cx/misc/bridge (see http://matthew.ath.cx/misc/systemnotes.pdf for the full system notes), which was largely designed to be EBU-limit-testing. It's a strong diamond system; 1D shows 16+ but not GF. GF single- or two-suited hands open at the 2 or 3 level; we use two-way transfer preempts at the 3-level and multis at the 2-level.

 

It's quite possible there's more merit available than this, but it's fun.