ruling with missing alert?

[the hog]

2NT 5/5 minors is not uncommon here. Slightly off the topic,as an opening I think it is badly designed, allowing both 3C and 3D to show 2 suited hands with both Majors eg

3C = 5H/4S, 3D = 5S/4H, 3M = natural s/s.

 

Better is 3C to show both minors and 2NT to show a minor pre empt

[hrothgar]

Agree completely

 

2NT to show a weak hand with both minors has always struck me a waste of a bid. Its far too easy to compete over.

 

I strong prefer to play 2NT as either

 

(a) a weak 3 level preempt in either minor

(allows the use of 3C/3D as a constructive preempt)

 

(:) Weak 2 suited hand, denying clubs

[pbleighton]

A pair at my club, who plays Precision, plays 2NT as both minors and weak. They alert it.

 

Precision Today recommends this bid as long as you use 1C-1D-1H as a relay to identify monster balanced hands.

 

Peter

[keylime]

Ok folks after a most lengthy discussion I as promised give you the ACBL exact answer to the popular question of 2NT's promised strength.

 

I received no less than 6 e-mails on this subject, and got nearly six different interpretations on this matter. However, finally, I got one from ACBL HQ in Memphis. Basically there's two rules that seems to contradict each other: rule 6, which states that an opening bid at the two level or higher must promise 10 HCP with two known suits, and rule 7, which states that an opening NT at the two level or higher must promise 5-4 distribution in the minors. At first glance, it would seem that these two rules somewhat clash. However, the explaination given was as follows...the ACBL now considers an opening 2NT showing a weak hand with minors as an adjunct to overcalling unusual 2NT in a competitive auction. They deem it as "constructive".

 

The director's materials I have are no longer current, thus adding to some of the confusion. The texts that I have on file tie both rules 6 and 7 together, so the inference is relatively clear that 2NT should have "values". This is NO longer the case. The new texts (which was happily sent to me by an ACBL employee) no longer tie these two items together - if anything they are very much stand alone in interpretation. I have printed these items and are in the 3 ring binder I carry with me for all tourneys I direct, whether online or elsewhere. I wished that the ACBL would make the rules a little bit more clear on this topic, but alas we are in the ACBL, and at times, they don't exactly make things clear.

 

Hopefully this clears up some of the utter confusion we had about the topic - evidently we are not the only ones that have wondered considering the e-mail responses I got back. By the way, Precision Today uses 2NT as a two suited minor preempt if memory serves.

 

D.

[the hog]

the ACBL now considers an opening 2NT showing a weak hand with minors as an adjunct to overcalling unusual 2NT in a competitive auction. They deem it as "constructive".

 

 

Fomcroflahms

 

(Falling off my chair, rolling on the floor laughing and holding my sides.)

Constructive indeed. They have de-constructed the English language.

[keylime]

Tell me about it....the ACBL is linguistically challenged I think! I'm still trying to figure out with as restrictive as the ACBL can be how they have decided to allow this to be permitted. First time for everything...

[mycroft]

Read the GCC as mutually inclusive, and it makes sense, no linguistics required. In fact, it's obvious that it's to be read this way, because when one rule wishes to trump another, it's explicitly stated as an exception (see the infamous "Disallowed, 7", and the places where it is referenced).

 

So, translating liberally:

 

6. You can make any bid 2C or higher to show two specific suits, at least 5-4, provided the bid promises 10 HCP.

 

7. In addition, you can open in NT, starting with 2NT, to show specifically both minors, at least 5-4, with no HCP restriction.

 

5. In addition, you can open 2D to show both majors, 4-4, with at least 10 HCP (but not 2C, 2H or any other call).

 

8. In addition, you can open 3NT to show an unspecified solid suit, or a broken minor, with no HCP restrictions.

 

and so on. If 7. wasn't going to be explicitly an exception to 6. it would be completely unnecessary.

 

Why is it allowed? Probably a holdover from the change from "allowed conventions by name" to "allowed if it fits this description" - about 20 years ago, IIRC. There are a lot of conventions allowed that aren't in the spirit of the GCC, but were common at the changeover time, so had to be worked in or the rank-and-file would complain (note, this is not ACBL-specific; the Multi holds an unusual place in both EBU and WBF (and, I'm sure other NCBOs') regulations, simply because "yeah, I know it should be [this category] by our definitions, but everybody including the LOLs play it, and people will scream if we don't let them.")

 

Frankly, Precision has been playing 2NT (and 3NT!) weak with minors (not in the basic system, but as a pretty obvious adjunct) since about 1975, and it got grandfathered in. If you read the GCC with a "list of permitted conventions" eye, you very quickly see "ok, this means they allow X, and Y, and Z"...

 

Thanks for the work on the tourneys, by the way! And for the wish and the effort to get it right...

Michael.