System restrictions in the US

[Quantumcat]

When I finish uni my boyfriend and I are planning to take a tour of the US for a year or so playing in as many regionals and nationals as possible. But I have heard that system restrictions are very severe over there compared to here (Australia). I just love our system so much, it has been several years in evolution and not being able to play it in some or all of the events would be a big factor in deciding whether to go or not (we might choose the UK instead). Are there any webpages that detail what restrictions there are in the different sorts of tournaments? I am having trouble finding such a page via Google.

[awm]

The ACBL rules about legal methods are quite restrictive; they are summarized here.

 

Something else that might be worth explaining is the ACBL policies about stratification/masterpoints. Regional and sectional events will typically be either stratified, stratiflighted, or bracketed. The stratified events are open to everyone (from beginners up to world champions). These events normally apply the General Convention Chart (first page in the document). Some events will be stratiflighted -- these have two separate divisions, one of which is limited to something like 1500 or 2000 master points or less and the other is open to anyone. The lower division normally applies the General Convention Chart and the upper division will apply the rather less restrictive Mid-Chart (page two). Bracketed events are split into small groups based on master point totals; usually this is just for knockout teams at regionals. "Playing up" is possible in principle but can be difficult in practice. In bracketed events the upper brackets will often allow the Mid-Chart.

 

At nationals there are all of the above kind of events, but the really important events are the NABC+ (national championship) events. Most of these use the Mid-Chart (page two of the notes). The Spingold and Vanderbilt (prestigious team events with very long matches) use the Super-Chart. The fast pairs use the General Chart.

 

As an international player, you can apply to the ACBL to be assigned some equivalent number of master points (based on your accomplishments / point totals in your home country). This will help to get into the appropriate group in bracketed events, but otherwise doesn't matter much.

 

The ACBL charts are occasionally hard to decipher, and there are some "boundary cases" that no one really knows if they are allowed or not. Coming from Australia the critical issues are probably:

 

(1) ACBL doesn't like artificial weak bids. Multi 2♦ is usually not allowed (except Mid-Chart team matches). Some of the other artificial preempts popular in Australia are banned altogether.

(2) ACBL doesn't like transfer openings, and they are not allowed outside Super-Chart events. Dunno how popular these really are in Oz, but some of the top pairs seem to play them.

(3) The ACBL general chart doesn't allow transfer responses to a non-strong 1♣ opening, nor an artificial 1♠ response to 1♥. They're both on the Mid-Chart though.

[Fluffy]

surprised to see that opening 2M with a 2 suiter is mid chart.

 

I wonder what chart would be my 1♦-1♥ response wich is either natural or very strong (slam try).

 

Also opening 2NT wich is either preempt in diamonds or weak in both minors seems disallowed execpt for super-charts :/

[awm]

surprised to see that opening 2M with a 2 suiter is mid chart.

 

I wonder what chart would be my 1♦-1♥ response wich is either natural or very strong (slam try).

 

Also opening 2NT wich is either preempt in diamonds or weak in both minors seems disallowed execpt for super-charts :/

 

Opening 2M with a two-suiter is one of these fuzzy areas, but mid-chart seems to be the majority opinion.

 

Your 1♦ - 1♥ bid is mid-chart. The mid-chart allows almost any response structure to opening bids.

 

The 2NT opening is probably mid-chart, since it qualifies as a transfer preempt (i.e. showing five or more diamonds, weak). But I guess it's not 100% clear.

[Free]

I'd suggest you come to Belgium. We don't have a government, but we are free in what we play (usuall no BSC or HUM, everything else is allowed) and we have chocolate. B-)

[helene_t]

forget about North America, go to Scotland instead:

http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/40771-scotland-is-open-for-business

[babalu1997]

I'd suggest you come to Belgium. We don't have a government, but we are free in what we play (usuall no BSC or HUM, everything else is allowed) and we have chocolate. B-)

 

Is the chocolate free?

[Vampyr]

Most places in Europe will have system regulations which are considerably more liberal than the Mid-Chart. But if the US is where you would really like to go, is using a different bidding system really a deal-breaker? You may find that using a different system (especially one that is very simple) broadens your horizons and helps you learn to think in different ways.

[Free]

Most places in Europe will have system regulations which are considerably more liberal than the Mid-Chart. But if the US is where you would really like to go, is using a different bidding system really a deal-breaker? You may find that using a different system (especially one that is very simple) broadens your horizons and helps you learn to think in different ways.

Meh, I think it's the other way around. We all played simple systems in the past, and our horizons opened when we saw what other posibilities existed.

[fred]

Meh, I think it's the other way around. We all played simple systems in the past, and our horizons opened when we saw what other posibilities existed.

FWIW Vampyr's hypothetical scenario mirrors exactly what happened to me.

 

I favored complex systems (though probably my notion of "complex" was quite a bit different than yours) for the first 5 years or so I played what I thought at the time to be "serious bridge". I came close to winning a World Championship near the end of this period so I guess I was not a completely hopeless player.

 

Then a new partner "forced" me to play a simple system with only a handful of conventions. I was deeply skeptical, but much to my surprise:

 

1) I found that I knew a lot less about bridge than I thought I did

2) I found that playing a simple system was a lot of fun

3) I found that playing a simple system could be highly effective

4) I became a much stronger player as a result

 

The entire experience was extremely enlightening, enjoyable, and liberating for me. If your mind is even remotedly open to this possibility, I strongly suggest that you try it.

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

[paulg]

To my mind it would be foolish to give up the opportunity of playing a lot of bridge in the US to go elsewhere.

 

I will admit that I am biased. I live in Scotland and there is a single 'decent' weekend event in our calendar. There are perhaps four decent weekend events in England over the year. I get more competitive bridge just attending the ACBL Summer Nationals every year. The ability to play against some of the world's best occurs at a number of events in Europe, but the ability to play against all of them happens three times a year in the US, not to mention all the other events that happen.

 

It is a hassle being an alien and you may end up with two systems - one for the regionals and lesser competitions and one for the Nationals. But your bridge experience will be a lot better in the US than elsewhere.

 

Cheers

 

Paul

[diana_eva]

I'd suggest you come to Belgium. We don't have a government, but we are free in what we play (usuall no BSC or HUM, everything else is allowed) and we have chocolate. B-)

 

and beer

[blackshoe]

Chocolate beer?

[Mbodell]

I should also note that what conventions you can play may differ a lot if you play different club events (where everything is at the club's choice and some clubs and regions are fairly liberal and some are fairly conservative - I can often play more systems [for instance, multi 2♦] in my local club game then you have recently been able to play in the Reisinger [the premier national BAM event]).

 

Sectionals and regionals often also have different rules for what is legal. Around me a bunch of sectionals allow mid-chart in pairs games and swiss teams, but some others don't.

 

Different regions in the US also have differing amounts of bridge available, and I'm not sure how much of your trip will be focused on the non-bridge sites versus the bridge sites. But travelling from Regional to Regional (and National) with the odd stop at a Sectional or Club and the odd stop to see the sites sounds like a terrific trip to me.

[Quantumcat]

I want to go to the US because there are so many more big tournaments on the calendar, where there will be opportunities to play against genuine world-class players. I can probably count on one hand the number of world class players here. And actually some of them are poached from New Zealand! If any other country can advertise an impressive calendar of events I shall certainly consider going there. I'd actually rather go somewhere in Europe, I've always wanted to visit Ireland (my name is Erin :)) but the bridge is more important than the sight-seeing. Also what is the bridge like in Canada? Is it worth spending some of the holiday there?

 

Looking at the convention chart, it is really hard to understand. Here is a basic gist of the system, maybe someone who understands the chart can advise?

 

Openings: 1D = 4 spades, 1C default balanced bid or clubs, 1nt variable, 1h might be 4

2-level openings: 2d = 12-15 diamonds, 2h = 4h longer minor 12-15, 2c strong or 16-19 diamonds

3+ level openings: 3d = like 2d only more so, namyats, 3nt=4-minor preempt

Responses: transfers to 1c, 1h relay to 1d, our own system over 1nt no transfers, transfers over interference of 1-level openings, muppet stayman over 2nt & kokish,

Rebids: 1c1s = strong bal or canape reverse in diamonds

Responder rebids: transfers

 

Also does anyone find this quote from the system chart funny:

Conventions and/or agreements whose primary purpose is to destroy the opponents' methods

It basically means that pre-empts are outlawed :rolleyes:

[aguahombre]

 

Also does anyone find this quote from the system chart funny:

Conventions and/or agreements whose primary purpose is to destroy the opponents' methods

It basically means that pre-empts are outlawed :rolleyes:

 

I disagree with your interpretation of that. Preempts describe to partner your length in a suit and the strength of your hand. They are part of most bidding systems and helpful in removing those hands from the possibilities when you open something else. Obstructing the opponents is only one aspect.

 

Term "preemptive" is also a problem. Every bid which jumps a level preempts someone, including CHO. "Preemptive" should not be used in place of "weak".

Edited February 20, 2011 by aguahombre

[Cascade]

I disagree with your interpretation of that. Preempts describe to partner your length in a suit and the strength of your hand. They are part of most bidding systems and helpful in removing those hands from the possibilities when you open something else. Obstructing the opponents is only one aspect.

 

Term "preemptive" is also a problem. Every bid which jumps a level preempts someone, including CHO. "Preemptive" should not be used in place of "weak".

 

When one opens with a three count 2♠ by partnership agreement is your purpose likely to be primarily destructive or descriptive to partner?

[aguahombre]

hence restrictions in some places. My post was about normal people and what their bids which jump a level are used for.

 

And his post was about all preempts. Your example could well qualify as primarily destructive.

[awm]

Openings: 1D = 4 spades, 1C default balanced bid or clubs, 1nt variable, 1h might be 4

2-level openings: 2d = 12-15 diamonds, 2h = 4h longer minor 12-15, 2c strong or 16-19 diamonds

3+ level openings: 3d = like 2d only more so, namyats, 3nt=4-minor preempt

Responses: transfers to 1c, 1h relay to 1d, our own system over 1nt no transfers, transfers over interference of 1-level openings, muppet stayman over 2nt & kokish,

Rebids: 1c1s = strong bal or canape reverse in diamonds

Responder rebids: transfers

 

The openings are mostly okay; there are two that might be questionable (seeming to fall into the fuzzy areas on the convention chart). These are 1♦ showing 4♠ (might qualify as an "all-purpose" opening depending who you ask) and 2♥ showing 4♥-longer minor (would definitely be fine if both suits were known, but they're not).

 

Certain response schemes that you play are mid-chart events only. These are transfers to 1♣ and 1♥ relay to 1♦.

 

You can get a semi-official ruling from rulings@acbl.org, however these too tend to be somewhat inconsistent. My guess is that most of what you play would be deemed acceptable in mid-chart events (and the highest flights of most regionals are mid-chart) but that you would run into some trouble in general-chart events.

[Mbodell]

Openings: 1D = 4 spades, 1C default balanced bid or clubs, 1nt variable, 1h might be 4

2-level openings: 2d = 12-15 diamonds, 2h = 4h longer minor 12-15, 2c strong or 16-19 diamonds

3+ level openings: 3d = like 2d only more so, namyats, 3nt=4-minor preempt

Responses: transfers to 1c, 1h relay to 1d, our own system over 1nt no transfers, transfers over interference of 1-level openings, muppet stayman over 2nt & kokish,

Rebids: 1c1s = strong bal or canape reverse in diamonds

Responder rebids: transfers

 

I mostly agree with awm, but actually think you might not make it even at midchart. Anything legal in GCC is also legal in midchart. As I see it your bids are:

 

1♣ - legal in GCC (as long as you show 10+ points, if the balanced is like 8-10 balanced or something, you might be no good).

1♦ - remote possibility that it is legal as "catch all" at GCC, some people play a legal 1♦ which promises a 4 card major (and 3+ diamonds), but quite likely that people will rule it a transfer opener and illegal for GCC. And if it is illegal for GCC it is also illegal for the new Mid Chart (the old one said it would be legal since it promises 4 cards in a new suit, the new mid chart lists the set of such legal bids and this one isn't there).

1♥ - legal at GCC.

1♠ - you didn't say what this is.

1nt variable - legal at GCC as long as the minimum strength is 8+. Your convention choices are limited if the minimum is less than 10 or the range is split (12-14 OR 17-20 at the same time in the same seat and vulnerability) or super wide.

2♣ - legal at GCC since it is strong.

2♦ - legal at GCC since it is natural.

2♥ - probably illegal at GCC. If it only showed that strength and 4+ hearts it would be fine. Since it also shows 5+ in an unknown suit it is probably stupidly illegal. And once again, it isn't legal at mid chart either. It would be legal in GCC if you specified which minor it was. It would be legal at midchart if it were weak, but not if it is intermediate (yes, this is idiotic).

2♠ - you didn't say what this is

3suit - fine

3nt - legal at GCC

namyats - legal at GCC

 

transfer responses to your non-forcing 1♣ - illegal at GCC (for now, I suspect this will be fine in another 5-10 years), legal at Midchart.

1♥/1♦ relay - illegal at GCC unless it is game forcing and not part of a relay system (I.e., not starting a whole bunch of relays). This is legal at mid chart unless it is both part of a relay system and not game forcing.

system over nt - fine at GCC as long as your nt is reasonable as outlined above.

transfers over interference - not legal at GCC unless their interference is conventional (although a number of people try to play this, and certainly do over negative doubles which maybe count as conventional?). Note, it is fine to play a transfer advance of the overcall, but not a transfer as responder of opener. Both are fine at midchart as long as it is constructive.

muppet staymen and kokish - legal at GCC.

 

I'm not sure what your last two lines mean so not sure how to judge them.

 

It is very silly that your system is not allowed since the bids that are questionable are all clearly constructive and mostly easy to defend against, but system regulators in the ACBL are not known for either their flexibility or common sense.

 

In practice you'd probably usually "get away" with playing your system in midchart since most people wouldn't really care. Especially if you described your 1♦ and 2♥ bids very carefully ("could be short diamond that is a catchall that just happens to have 4 ♠ always" and "natural with hearts that just happens to always have a longer minor").

[helene_t]

You could probably explain your 1♦ and 2♥ openings in such a way that the four spades, and the longer minor, would be negative inference rather than part of the definition.

[gnasher]

To my mind it would be foolish to give up the opportunity of playing a lot of bridge in the US to go elsewhere.

 

I will admit that I am biased. I live in Scotland and there is a single 'decent' weekend event in our calendar. There are perhaps four decent weekend events in England over the year. I get more competitive bridge just attending the ACBL Summer Nationals every year. The ability to play against some of the world's best occurs at a number of events in Europe, but the ability to play against all of them happens three times a year in the US, not to mention all the other events that happen.

 

I agree with this (about bridge in the ACBL, not about the disadvantages of living in Scotland :) ). Some other advantages of ACBL events are:

- They tend to run multiple events in parallel, so the field in the top event contains fewer weak players.

- They start on time.

- Everyone speaks English. I know that sounds rather parochial, but time spent thinking about how to communicate in a foreign langauge is time spent not thinking about bridge.

[Free]

FWIW Vampyr's hypothetical scenario mirrors exactly what happened to me.

 

I favored complex systems (though probably my notion of "complex" was quite a bit different than yours) for the first 5 years or so I played what I thought at the time to be "serious bridge". I came close to winning a World Championship near the end of this period so I guess I was not a completely hopeless player.

 

Then a new partner "forced" me to play a simple system with only a handful of conventions. I was deeply skeptical, but much to my surprise:

 

1) I found that I knew a lot less about bridge than I thought I did

2) I found that playing a simple system was a lot of fun

3) I found that playing a simple system could be highly effective

4) I became a much stronger player as a result

 

The entire experience was extremely enlightening, enjoyable, and liberating for me. If your mind is even remotedly open to this possibility, I strongly suggest that you try it.

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

The problem is describing what makes systems simple and what makes them complex. Simple systems can get complex as well, you can start with a basic 2/1 scheme and adopt lots of conventions, relays, transfers, slam bidding treatments,... Do we still have a simple system?

 

What I basically meant was that pretty much everyone learned some standard system first. Then we saw other, more complex systems which had (or seemed to have) high potential. Some of us got interested in those, like you (apparently) and me, and made the step to switch to such a system. Our old forum poster and friend Misho once told me in my MOSCITO-period that I'd return to natural systems. He was right. With my main f2f partner now I play some sort of 2/1, but still in a complex way. We don't need the complex stuff every session we play, so it looks like a simple system. But under the hood we have a powerful engine just in case it comes up. I'm pretty sure you and Brad have lots of agreements that can make an auction very complex to give detailed information to partner, but they just don't come up that often.

 

In my experience complex systems take away some of the judgement you need playing simple systems. Using correct judgement in a simple system gives more satisfaction than letting the system do it's job on its own. If you failed however, it's your own fault and you can learn from it, while if you play a complex system you can usually blame the system more easily.

 

Note however that I have another f2f partner who likes to experiment a lot. We now switched from natural to precision a few months ago, because we both think it's more fun during the auctions. The system is more complex for sure. I heard you also gave precision a try a while ago, so I guess it's safe to say the attraction to complexity isn't completely gone. ;)

[Vampyr]

The problem is describing what makes systems simple and what makes them complex. Simple systems can get complex as well, you can start with a basic 2/1 scheme and adopt lots of conventions, relays, transfers, slam bidding treatments,... Do we still have a simple system?

 

Of course not -- that is the point. I used to have the opportunity to play fairly regularly with a world-class player. He would only consent to playing "Acol like your granny played it -- and probably still does". We played 4-card suits, Acol twos, strong jump overcalls, penalty doubles of overcalls, weak takeouts, etc. Our conventions were Stayman, Blackwood and Truscott, and one or two things to defend against their artificial bids.

 

I found it much the same as Fred found his experience with a simple system -- it was fun, surprisingly effective, and it really helped improve my bridge game.

[blackshoe]

In my experience complex systems take away some of the judgement you need playing simple systems.

 

That's precisely what an expert friend of mine said when we played together for a while a few years back. He also said that this is the reason he preferred SA to 2/1.