new ACBL convention chart ?

[Shugart23]

Are 'they' coming out with new (colored?) updated Convention Charts to replace the old GCC ?.....Also, looking to see if a multi-2NT bid will be allowed or does an opening of 2NT remain as strictly either a natural bid or a hand containing both Minors ? Thank you

[steve2005]

My link

 

 

[Shugart23]

My link

 

 

thanks much........so an actual 'chart' is currently a work in progress ? (Your link was very helpful)

[steve2005]

2N can be used to show 2 Known suits in Open (which is similar to mid-chart)

Not sure what Multi for 2N is/

For open+ (which is like super chart)In​ ​segments​ ​of​ ​fewer​ ​than​ ​6​ ​boards,​ ​an​ ​Artificial​ ​opening​ ​Preempt​ ​below​ ​3NT​ ​that​ ​does not​ ​show​ ​at​ ​least​ ​one​ ​known​ ​suit.. You could have something multi for 2N but is only at teams really and there are other restriction you would have to read in the link I gave

[barmar]

thanks much........so an actual 'chart' is currently a work in progress ? (Your link was very helpful)

The convention charts have never (or not recently) actually been in "chart" format, they've just been a page of textual lists. They'd more accurately be called convention regulations.

 

There's an Alert Chart, but it's just considered a concise summary of the Alert Procedures.

[blackshoe]

thanks much........so an actual 'chart' is currently a work in progress ? (Your link was very helpful)

The new "charts" are an agenda item for the fall BoD meeting, with a proposed implementation date of 1 March 2018.

[steve2005]

The new "charts" are an agenda item for the fall BoD meeting, with a proposed implementation date of 1 March 2018.

Anyone know the final to be presented. The last draft was sep 15

[hrothgar]

Anyone know the final to be presented. The last draft was sep 15

 

Looks like the Board of Govenors kicked the can down the road until Phlly

 

Pretty ridiculous from my perspective given how long the materials have been available and how open the process has been.

[blackshoe]

I think you mean the BoD kicked it to Philly. It was item 173-20 on the BoD agenda for SD.

[perko90]

I was at Philly and I heard from reliable sources that the new Convention Charts passed!

It will take effect for the Hawaii Fall NABC.

[pescetom]

My link

 

Am I missing something, or do the Basic and Basic+ "charts" disallow a natural strong 2 level suit opening? :blink:

[BillHiggin]

Am I missing something, or do the Basic and Basic+ "charts" disallow a natural strong 2 level suit opening? :blink:

 

You are missing something:

 

1. Any opening bid in a suit that is Natural, as long as it shows at least Near-AverageStrength.

[pescetom]

You are missing something:

 

1. Any opening bid in a suit that is Natural, as long as it shows at least Near-AverageStrength.

 

But “Near​ ​Average​ ​Strength” is defined as a hand that has at least 8 HCP, whereas a natural strong 2-opener should be "Very Strong" or at least close to that.

Or would they allow (say) a 2H opening that shows at least 15 points, with 1H limited to 11-14?

Doesn't sound at all natural to me.

[perko90]

But “Near​ ​Average​ ​Strength” is defined as a hand that has at least 8 HCP, whereas a natural strong 2-opener should be "Very Strong" or at least close to that.

Or would they allow (say) a 2H opening that shows at least 15 points, with 1H limited to 11-14?

Doesn't sound at all natural to me.

 

I think you're confusing yourself. "Natural" at the 2 level means 5 or more in the suit and as long as it shows 8+ HCPs, it's allowed. It could promise 11+, 15+, 19+ or whatever.

[hrothgar]

I was at Philly and I heard from reliable sources that the new Convention Charts passed!

It will take effect for the Hawaii Fall NABC.

 

This is definitely good news.

 

Sadly, they amended things to restore the Defensive Database

[blackshoe]

You mean we still need an approved defense before we can use our convention? Crap. :(

[hrothgar]

You mean we still need an approved defense before we can use our convention? Crap. :(

 

Yeap...

 

On the bright side, the Defensive Database only applies to a subset of the bids on the Open+ Chart.

 

Moreover, if the C&C doesn't respond within 30 days of a player submitting a method, its gets a provisional approval.

 

(Given the C&C's record with updating their web site...)

[ldrews]

I must be missing something. I play a version of Precision Club. In Precision Club an opening bid of 2C represents a 11-15 HCP and 6 card club suit or a 5 card club suit + 4 card major. The Basic and Basic+ Charts indicate that a 2 level opening bid may be Average Strength hand with at least a 5/4 shape and both suits known. With Precision Club both suits are not known since the 5 club + 4 major has an unknown major or the 6 club does not have a second suit.

 

Based on my reading Precision Club would not be allowed under Basic and Basic+ Chart events.

[pescetom]

I think you're confusing yourself. "Natural" at the 2 level means 5 or more in the suit and as long as it shows 8+ HCPs, it's allowed. It could promise 11+, 15+, 19+ or whatever.

 

I'm not confusing myself at all, but if that's how it is intended to be interpreted, fine and thanks.

I would be quite happy to play in a place where one could experiment with things like 1-level majors being 8-14 and 2-level being 15+, I just couldn't look Culbertson in the face and call it natural :)

[hrothgar]

I must be missing something. I play a version of Precision Club. In Precision Club an opening bid of 2C represents a 11-15 HCP and 6 card club suit or a 5 card club suit + 4 card major. The Basic and Basic+ Charts indicate that a 2 level opening bid may be Average Strength hand with at least a 5/4 shape and both suits known. With Precision Club both suits are not known since the 5 club + 4 major has an unknown major or the 6 club does not have a second suit.

 

Based on my reading Precision Club would not be allowed under Basic and Basic+ Chart events.

 

I believe that you are mis reading the charts.

 

Under definitions:

 

2. ***​ ​“Natural”​:

 

...

b. Any opening bid at the two-level or higher showing 5 or more cards in the suit

bid.

...

i. A call is still Natural if it also shows distribution in another suit.

 

Therefore, a 2♣ opening which promises 5+ Clubs is defined as natural, regardless of whether it might also contain a side 4 card major.

 

Furthermore, the Basic Chart sanctions

 

1. Any opening bid in a suit that is Natural, as long as it shows at least Near-Average Strength.

[ldrews]

I believe that you are mis reading the charts.

 

Under definitions:

 

 

 

Therefore, a 2♣ opening which promises 5+ Clubs is defined as natural, regardless of whether it might also contain a side 4 card major.

 

Furthermore, the Basic Chart sanctions

 

1. Any opening bid in a suit that is Natural, as long as it shows at least Near-Average Strength.

 

Thank you, I did miss that.

[barmar]

I'm not confusing myself at all, but if that's how it is intended to be interpreted, fine and thanks.

I would be quite happy to play in a place where one could experiment with things like 1-level majors being 8-14 and 2-level being 15+, I just couldn't look Culbertson in the face and call it natural :)

In general, "natural" in this context just refers to whether bidding a suit shows that suit, and strength requirements are treated separately. Culbertson might have considered it natural that higher levels show more strength, but that concept was mostly abandoned decades ago.

[pescetom]

In general, "natural" in this context just refers to whether bidding a suit shows that suit, and strength requirements are treated separately. Culbertson might have considered it natural that higher levels show more strength, but that concept was mostly abandoned decades ago.

 

I understand and agree to a certain extent. Using a higher level to show less strength was around before Culbertson and does little to undermine the original logic of bridge, 1-level openings remaining the same. But there is a fundamental question of semantics (with implications for the rights of players): whether natural indicates an inherent logic of bridge (the rules have changed little since Culbertson, but the types of competition more) or just whatever has proved more effective and is widely played today, perhaps in your own country. Whichever side of the fence you are on, I would postulate that excessive liberty to define strength levels (see my examples) puts at risk the very concept of naturality.

[barmar]

I understand and agree to a certain extent. Using a higher level to show less strength was around before Culbertson and does little to undermine the original logic of bridge, 1-level openings remaining the same. But there is a fundamental question of semantics (with implications for the rights of players): whether natural indicates an inherent logic of bridge (the rules have changed little since Culbertson, but the types of competition more) or just whatever has proved more effective and is widely played today, perhaps in your own country. Whichever side of the fence you are on, I would postulate that excessive liberty to define strength levels (see my examples) puts at risk the very concept of naturality.

Althought the ACBL chart doesn't specify this correlation, the more common tendency is that higher bidding levels show extra length in natural systems, not extra strength. E.g. weak 2's usually have 6 cards in the suit, 3-level openings have 7, etc. I suspect this was true in Culbertson's day as well; 3-level and higher preempts were normal long before weak 2 bids gained popularity.

 

The definition of "natural" in the new chart simply says that an opening on the 2 level or higher is natural if it shows 5+ cards in the suit bid.

[barmar]

I'd like to steer this thread back to the changes themselves...

What do you think are going to be the most popular changes to systems/bidding based on these changes?

Does this question really belong here? It seems like it would be more appropriate in a more general forum. Yes, it's related to law changes, but it's not really about the legal issues but bridge playing.