The Loop

[Vampyr]

(under some regulations that don't let opponents agree defences after bidding period started)

This is probably allowed only in the ACBL with their booklets. I don't think it's actually legal, but that's life.

[hrothgar]

 

> (under some regulations that don't let opponents agree defences after bidding period started)

 

This is probably allowed only in the ACBL with their booklets. I don't think it's actually legal, but that's life.

 

I just had a horrifying idea...

 

In theory, here in the glorious ACBL, one might define a defense to a multi 2D opening in which a double showed precise

 

♠ AKQJ

♥ 2

♦ KQ54

♣ AQT2

 

Then, we define a second defense, such a double describes

 

♠ AKQJ

♥ 3

♦ KQ54

♣ AQT2

 

Repeat, ad nauseam, until we exhaust the set of hands that might consider bidding over a multi 2D

 

Once the opponent's open multi in a pairs even, we sort through the set of defenses until we find the one that best identifies our hand...

[aguahombre]

This is probably allowed only in the ACBL with their booklets. I don't think it's actually legal, but that's life.

I notice that pre-submitting system cards for WBF events is not complied with by all pairs. Is that true, or are some of them just not published on the site?

 

If everyone does submit cards in advance, for teams to study and develope defenses, then my question doesn't apply.

 

If not, doesn't WBF allow use of the booklets?

[blackshoe]

This is probably allowed only in the ACBL with their booklets. I don't think it's actually legal, but that's life.

I must have missed something somewhere. What booklets?

[aguahombre]

I must have missed something somewhere. What booklets?

We are talking about "approved defenses" to Multi, etc. At least I think that is what Vamp meant.

[barmar]

I think she's referring to the written defenses that players are required to provide for Mid-Chart agreements. ACBL allows you to wait until the situation comes up before consulting them and deciding which defense to use.

[blackshoe]

Ah, I see.

[Fluffy]

I just had a horrifying idea...

 

In theory, here in the glorious ACBL, one might define a defense to a multi 2D opening in which a double showed precise

 

♠ AKQJ

♥ 2

♦ KQ54

♣ AQT2

 

Then, we define a second defense, such a double describes

 

♠ AKQJ

♥ 3

♦ KQ54

♣ AQT2

 

Repeat, ad nauseam, until we exhaust the set of hands that might consider bidding over a multi 2D

 

Once the opponent's open multi in a pairs even, we sort through the set of defenses until we find the one that best identifies our hand...

No need to go to the extreme, I think just having 2M as natural and 2M as takeout is already good enough to abuse the rule.

[Vampyr]

If not, doesn't WBF allow use of the booklets?

 

I don't believe that any jurisdictons apart from the ACBL allow reference to written materials, or consultation between partners during the auction.

 

I can't find my lawbook. but doing the above is against about three laws (which might be one reason why it is not practiced elsewhere).

[Finch]

I don't believe that any jurisdictons apart from the ACBL allow reference to written materials, or consultation between partners during the auction.

 

I can't find my lawbook. but doing the above is against about three laws (which might be one reason why it is not practiced elsewhere).

 

Virtually all jurisdictions, including the EBL, the WBF and the EBU, allow reference to written materials during the auction under certain circumstances (usually against HUM systems & brown sticker conventions).

Consultation between partners during the auction is not allowed anywhere, so far as I know.

[Vampyr]

Virtually all jurisdictions, including the EBL, the WBF and the EBU, allow reference to written materials during the auction under certain circumstances (usually against HUM systems & brown sticker conventions).

 

Oh, OK. I was wondering, actually, about HUM and brown sticker, but thought they were virtually never permitted. Do you know what events allow them?

 

Consultation between partners during the auction is not allowed anywhere, so far as I know.

 

It used to be the case that if the ACBL booklet had more than one defense (they did for the Multi) you could choose one when it was your turn and tell partner which one you had chosen. I do not know if this is still true.

[blackshoe]

It used to be the case that if the ACBL booklet had more than one defense (they did for the Multi) you could choose one when it was your turn and tell partner which one you had chosen. I do not know if this is still true.

Neither do I. I do know the current regulations do not specify a time by which or at which a pair must choose its defense. Currently the Multi is the only Midchart agreement for which two options are provided in the defense database. It does seem to me rather odd that it would be permitted to make such a decision during the auction, but I suppose if you are not permitted to discuss it with partner but must, as Stefanie suggests, make your own decision and simply inform partner what decision you made, that's better than letting the pair discuss it in the middle of the auction. There is the case where a pair have developed their own defense, and have it on their card. It would seem more than just odd if either defender is suddenly allowed to decide, in the middle of the auction, to use the ACBL provided defense in such a case. Again, though, nothing in the regulations, so I suppose it's "custom and practice", and I have no idea what that is in these cases.

[Vampyr]

Neither do I.

 

Don't you play in the ACBL though?

 

There is the case where a pair have developed their own defense, and have it on their card.

 

Are they permitted to look at their card during the auction?

[Finch]

Oh, OK. I was wondering, actually, about HUM and brown sticker, but thought they were virtually never permitted. Do you know what events allow them?

 

 

 

It used to be the case that if the ACBL booklet had more than one defense (they did for the Multi) you could choose one when it was your turn and tell partner which one you had chosen. I do not know if this is still true.

 

This list is not exclusive, but in the UK the premier league and the final stages of the gold cup, for example.

[paulg]

Oh, OK. I was wondering, actually, about HUM and brown sticker, but thought they were virtually never permitted. Do you know what events allow them?

The EBU permits a number of agreements at Level 4, particularly in the area of two-level opening bids, that are Brown Sticker Conventions but playable in almost all events.

 

In Scotland Brown Sticker Conventions are permitted, subject to pre-event disclosure, in events where you play 16-board matches, which means the Scottish Cup and Winter Foursomes.

[paulg]

There is the case where a pair have developed their own defense, and have it on their card.

Are they permitted to look at their card during the auction?

In most jurisdictions the written defence is deemed to be part of the opponent's system card, meaning that you can refer to it when it is your turn to call.

[blackshoe]

Don't you play in the ACBL though?

 

[snip]

 

Are they permitted to look at their card during the auction?

I do play in the ACBL, though not in Midchart events (they're scarce as hen's teeth around here).

 

From the Midchart: "A defense to a method which requires the above pre-Alert (whether the approved one or one provided by the opposing pair) may be referred to during the auction by both pairs". This does not address your question about defenses the pair agrees before the session, i.e., not (necessarily) in the defense database or provided by the opponents who are using a Midchart convention for which they are required to provide a defense. I don't know what happens in practice, but my first inclination would be to say that if you devise your own defense, you can't refer to your card about it during the auction. I suspect I'm probably wrong though.

[gnasher]

Are the ACBL regulations not accessible to the ACBL-based participants in this discussion?

From http://www.acbl.org/...sedatabase.html :

 

"When playing in an event governed by the ACBL Mid-Chart, you may refer, during the bidding and/or play, to any defense contained herein to a Mid-Chart method being used by your opponents (you may also refer to your own defensive method)."

 

There is nothing there to say that you can discuss which defence to play after the auction has started. Anyway, you can't, because it's prohibited by Law 73A1.

[gnasher]

It used to be the case that if the ACBL booklet had more than one defense (they did for the Multi) you could choose one when it was your turn and tell partner which one you had chosen. I do not know if this is still true.

People may have done this, but are you sure that it was actually allowed?

[Vampyr]

People may have done this, but are you sure that it was actually allowed?

 

Yes, it was specifically allowed.

[blackshoe]

Yes, it was specifically allowed.

By written regulation, or because a TD said so?

[Vampyr]

By written regulation, or because a TD said so?

 

It was printed in the booklet.

[aguahombre]

It was printed in the booklet.

And confirmed by a BBO Vugraph Operator on more than one occasion ---not that they are neccessarily authorities, but they have the advantage of listening and being on scene.

[blackshoe]

Huh. Well, it's the ACBL. Who knows? :unsure:

[Zelandakh]

It seems to me that if I played in the ACBL I should create defences to all of these conventions that only handle the awkward hands for the recommended ones. Then I can use our defence if holding one of those hands but switch to a recommended one otherwise. The big benefit of this method is that we effectively get twice as much bidding space as normal. In some cases, I daresay we can get more space back than the opponents' preempt took away. I assume it is illegal for us to prepare 2 (or more) of our own defences...