Non-Natural Systems

[32519]

The contributors to this forum have a phenomenal amount of knowledge regarding various Non-Natural Systems. Apart from Precision with all its variants, how many of the other NNS are allowed by the controlling bodies in the different countries? From these forums, it appears as though the USA is amongst the most restrictive. Yet the USA (excluding China?) has more bridge players than all (most?) other countries.

 

Which leads me to the question that I have been unable to find the answer to myself: How does having all this knowledge help if –

1.) You will rarely, if ever, get to play your own NNS?

2.) You will rarely, if ever, get to play against a NNS?

[brian_m]

The contributors to this forum have a phenomenal amount of knowledge regarding various Non-Natural Systems. Apart from Precision with all its variants, how many of the other NNS are allowed by the controlling bodies in the different countries? From these forums, it appears as though the USA is amongst the most restrictive. Yet the USA (excluding China?) has more bridge players than all (most?) other countries.

 

Which leads me to the question that I have been unable to find the answer to myself: How does having all this knowledge help if –

1.) You will rarely, if ever, get to play your own NNS?

2.) You will rarely, if ever, get to play against a NNS?

 

I suspect the answer to your questions are the reason why a lot of people choose to play on BBO - a freedom from arbitrary systems restrictions (unless you're Australian, they have the most liberal national regulations. AFAIK).

 

There's also the fact that many partnerships may be separated by large distances. I play a system with my regular partner which the ACBL would deem illegal on multiple counts - but since she's in New Zealand and I'm in the USA, we don't really care what the offline regulations are.

[Free]

I can't answer that for myself, since we have quite flexible regulations which allow many systems. As a result, I get to play my NNS, and I encounter other NNS's now and then.

 

When you're very restricted in what you're allowed to play you pretty much see one side of the story. I guess it's useful to see what opportunities you're missing out on, see other design goals which might make a lot of sense, and sometimes legally implement similar principles into your own natural system.

 

For example, suppose you're used to play 4 card Majors, open your lowest 4 card suit (even with 4M-4m) and raise only with a 4 card fit. All of a sudden you see ACOL (which is also natural) or MOSCITO (highly artificial), both systems play Majors first style, and both systems raise to 2-level on a 3 card fit. You can try to play MAFIA style first and implement 3 card raises later (or the other way around), and will probably see that it works quite well.

 

Also, when you encounter a pimped natural system, you can recognize some design goals and principles, which can help you in knowing what to do against it.

[PrecisionL]

My preferred system is a strong club variant with Majors first, always.

 

In ACBLand I am able to use any design I want after an opening bid of 1♣ if it is 15+ hcp. Thus, I play three versions (with 3 different partners) of a strong club system which are quite unlike each other.

 

One convention I can't play that I miss is transfers to opening bids, however allowed if 2nd hand doubles or partner overcalls.

 

A good NT defense is multi-Landy (Robinson / Woolsey) which is rarely allowed in ACBL GCC events (but is allowed in the DC area - Maryland / Virgina).

[Cthulhu D]

Which leads me to the question that I have been unable to find the answer to myself: How does having all this knowledge help if –

1.) You will rarely, if ever, get to play your own NNS?

2.) You will rarely, if ever, get to play against a NNS?

 

I'm not sure system regulations are that restrictive, particularly if you play in major events all the time. Unless you're playing a HUM or to a lesser extent in the US. You can play MOSCITO in the UK & Europe for example at the right events.

[hrothgar]

I'm not sure system regulations are that restrictive, particularly if you play in major events all the time. Unless you're playing a HUM or to a lesser extent in the US. You can play MOSCITO in the UK & Europe for example at the right events.

 

And yet its banned completely in the US, as is multi (for all intents and purposes)

[awm]

There is an unfortunate tendency to conflate "system" with "openings." It's true that opening bids are quite often restricted in a wide variety of ways. Arguably the vast majority of opening structures are forbidden, even in places like Australia that are quite permissive, if only because disclosing a method where each opening could be one of 100 varieties of hand is basically impossible.

 

With that said, even in the United States there are very few restrictions on bidding after the opening (i.e. on the mid-chart "all constructive methods are permitted"). While people like to experiment with random opening structures, I do think the biggest opportunities for gains (other than by opponents' unfamiliarity) are actually regarding agreements in the later rounds.

[PrecisionL]

And yet its banned completely in the US, as is multi (for all intents and purposes)

 

Multi is allowed in 6-board matches or greater (in ACBLand) in A bracket KOs and Swiss A/X and I have played this convention. I have also played Multi-Landy over an opponent's NT opening which is also a mid-chart convention even in non A events (2000 MP / person or higher) on the east coast of the USA.

[Cthulhu D]

There is an unfortunate tendency to conflate "system" with "openings." It's true that opening bids are quite often restricted in a wide variety of ways. Arguably the vast majority of opening structures are forbidden, even in places like Australia that are quite permissive, if only because disclosing a method where each opening could be one of 100 varieties of hand is basically impossible.

 

With that said, even in the United States there are very few restrictions on bidding after the opening (i.e. on the mid-chart "all constructive methods are permitted"). While people like to experiment with random opening structures, I do think the biggest opportunities for gains (other than by opponents' unfamiliarity) are actually regarding agreements in the later rounds.

 

This is a much more articulate statement of what I was trying to say. The flipside is of course that heavy continuations are very difficult to talk about in this format, so many auctions are contested it's not so valuable, and your number of permutations are so huge that discussing what responder's various options should mean over an auction like:

 

1C! (short)-1D! (hearts); 1H! (weak NT or unbalanced with 3 card support)-1S! (forcing relay); 1NT! (bal without real clubs)-2D! (game forcing); 2S (exactly 2 hearts and 4 spades, and either 4-3, 4-3 or 5-2 in the minors) isn't friendly to forum discussion. That said responder should have a pretty good idea of opener's hand at this junction.

[Raff90]

Well in Austria you can nearly play anything ♥.

So im happy that there is so much information about non natural stuff in this forum.

im rarely suprised when someone comes up with a new convention :)

[Free]

With that said, even in the United States there are very few restrictions on bidding after the opening (i.e. on the mid-chart "all constructive methods are permitted").

Yet there is no clear definition of what is constructive... :rolleyes:

 

AFAIK you can't play a 2-way relay (for example 1♦-1♥ = GF relay or 6+ natural), while both hands respond constructively.

[VMars]

Multi is allowed in 6-board matches or greater (in ACBLand) in A bracket KOs and Swiss A/X and I have played this convention. I have also played Multi-Landy over an opponent's NT opening which is also a mid-chart convention even in non A events (2000 MP / person or higher) on the east coast of the USA.

 

 

You're allowed to play Multi-Landy as a defense to NT opening at all levels on the West Coast.

[Cthulhu D]

Yet there is no clear definition of what is constructive... :rolleyes:

 

AFAIK you can't play a 2-way relay (for example 1♦-1♥ = GF relay or 6+ natural), while both hands respond constructively.

 

What.. why?

[relknes]

What.. why?

Because at the midchart level, a relay system must promise game forcing values.

[Cthulhu D]

Because at the midchart level, a relay system must promise game forcing values.

 

I've just read the ACBL regulations PDF as posted here: http://www.acbl.org/assets/documents/play/Convention-Chart.pdf for the first time in my life, and I am more confused about its content than before. If a relay system (midcharted, disallowed, point 5) is defined as a 'tell me more' setup, isn't stayman (if playing in an enviroment where you may use it as garbage or the start of all invites) or two way checkback stayman a relay? And what's the difference between a constructive treatment (midchart) and a non-destructive treatment (super chart).

 

Edit: I suspect there is no good answers for any of the above, and my comment is more a 'what the hell' rather than anything useful for discussion

[relknes]

I've just read the ACBL regulations PDF as posted here: http://www.acbl.org/assets/documents/play/Convention-Chart.pdf for the first time in my life, and I am more confused about its content than before. If a relay system (midcharted, disallowed, point 5) is defined as a 'tell me more' setup, isn't stayman (if playing in an enviroment where you may use it as garbage or the start of all invites) or two way checkback stayman a relay? And what's the difference between a constructive treatment (midchart) and a non-destructive treatment (super chart).

 

Edit: I suspect there is no good answers for any of the above, and my comment is more a 'what the hell' rather than anything useful for discussion

Stayman is covered under item 10 on the general chart (all calls are allowed after a natural NT opener that promises at least 10 points and has a range of 5 or less high card points). It is also not a relay because opener's response says something about their hand, where a relay bid tells opener something and their response says nothing other than a desire for more information (hence the "tell me more" terminology). You might consider a 2♠ response to a 1N opening in SA to be a relay, since it is a puppet to 3♣ and says nothing further about opener's hand, but that is still covered under item 10 of the GCC.

Also note that relay or puppet bids themselves are ok at midchart, but a "system" of relays (and no, I can't define that precisely) has to promise game forcing values.

[awm]

I'm 99% sure that 1♥ as natural 6+ points or GF relay is allowed on the mid-chart. The ACBL regulations about relay system are admittedly weird, but the basic point is that the 1♥ bid is not a relay by ACBL definition (it does give information about responder's hand and it doesn't force any particular call from opener). If there is a sequence of relays (note that a "relay system" must involve a sequence of relays, not just one) it will be a game forcing sequence.

 

In fact I've played against this 1♥ response and had it ruled legal by national directors, and Josh Sher had an even more relay-like response (cheapest step = any inv+, relays follow but only if GF) ruled legal on the mid-chart. I've also seen a 2♣ response to 1M that is artificial GF and start of relays ruled legal on the general chart in a national. So I wouldn't worry about this one.

 

I agree that ACBL's rules about opening bids are very restrictive.

[mgoetze]

I agree that ACBL's rules about opening bids are very restrictive.

 

Great, now you just need to agree that the ACBL's rules on continuations are needlessly convoluted and subject to varying interpretations.

 

As I understand it, Stayman could be a relay but is usually not a relay system. Fortunately I don't care. :)

[Vampyr]

Stayman is covered under item 10 on the general chart (all calls are allowed after a natural NT opener that promises at least 10 points and has a range of 5 or less high card points).

 

So in the ACBL a Stayman bid must promise 10 points?

[Cthulhu D]

So in the ACBL a Stayman bid must promise 10 points?

 

No, you can only bid stayman if your NT opening is 10+ with a 3 point range. So if you play 10-14 or 9-12 you are banned from using conventions over 1NT openings.

 

I have to say, the difference between 'constructive' and 'non destructive' is typical of the confusing writing at hand.

[Zelandakh]

It is also not a relay because opener's response says something about their hand, where a relay bid tells opener something and their response says nothing other than a desire for more information (hence the "tell me more" terminology).

This is untrue. Stayman is absolutely a relay. Most relays say something about the relayer's hand, even if the bidders themselves do not disclose it (or sometimes simply do not understand it). Relay systems have relay breaks. Not using a relay break means that the relay itself has a meaning.

 

As mgoetze points out Stayman is not on its own a relay system. However it can be part of a relay system with certain follow-ups. Also, Adam has pointed out many times on these forums that what the ACBL means by the term relay system is not the same as what the rest of the bridge world means. A 1♥ response as "hearts or GF" is legal because any given relay sequence leads to game. Of course any given Director might choose to interpret this differently.

[Free]

Oh boy, I've opened the box... ;)

[mycroft]

Multi is allowed in 6-board matches or greater (in ACBLand) in A bracket KOs and Swiss A/X and I have played this convention.

So, "effectively banned" unless you want to learn two systems, one to play at pairs, and one to play at teams (even assuming that you are *sure* you're going to get into "top bracket KOs", which I'm not, and will only play in mid-chart events).

 

Multi and Polish 2s (or whatever) and Multi-Landy/Woolsey are "bolt-on conventions" that can be put on or taken off without real issues; but if the nature of the system *required* Multi 2♦ to work - it would have to be effectively redesigned to operate without - then Multi is "effectively banned" in the ACBL...

 

That's what they want - that's fine. But "it's allowed if you look hard" or "it's allowed if you're a pro/have 5000 MPs" still isn't an effective response.

[benlessard]

Heard that 1C--(not strong but be be as short as 1 if 4441)---1S(no M) wasnt allowed in the top MP field in acbl land.

 

The 10-14 range allow for stayman anything wider doesnt.