Double of Strong No Trump Opener

[sheilafran]

Hi

 

I would like to know if this is legal at club level playing duplicate

 

Opener bids 1NT (15-17) the next person doubles which is alerted as either

 

Long Minor

Both Majors

or a strong hand

 

I have looked in the Rule book but cannot find the answe

 

Many thanks

[wank]

yes entirely. any competitive methods are allowed in south africa. i've never even been to africa but that took me about 20 seconds to find on the sabf website.

[pescetom]

yes entirely. any competitive methods are allowed in south africa. i've never even been to africa but that took me about 20 seconds to find on the sabf website.

 

I spent a little longer and found this, which is quite restrictive about methods:

 

Regulations for the control of conventions

 

At a glance it doesn't consider such an agreement based on a double rather than a suit call, but it does incorporate the usual bans on HUMs, Brown Stickers, Psyches of strong artifical openings, etc. plus some arbitrary limits on 2 and 3 level openings that are anything but liberal and tend to limit any convention to a single meaning. It also forbids conventions that are primarily aimed to disrupt opponent's bidding.

 

I would ask the SABF and I wouldn't expect a positive reply.

[steve2005]

yes entirely. any competitive methods are allowed in south africa. i've never even been to africa but that took me about 20 seconds to find on the sabf website.

Even in ACBL any meaning for double is allowed.

[PhilG007]

Hi

 

I would like to know if this is legal at club level playing duplicate

 

Opener bids 1NT (15-17) the next person doubles which is alerted as either

 

Long Minor

Both Majors

or a strong hand

 

I have looked in the Rule book but cannot find the answe

 

Many thanks

As long as the double is alerted as conventional,it's perfectly legal. You now have the

opportunity to question its meaning at your turn to bid.

[Vampyr]

At a glance it doesn't consider such an agreement based on a double rather than a suit call, but it does incorporate the usual bans on ... Psyches of strong artifical openings

 

Is this really “usual”? I knew it was the case in th ACBL, and recently heard it was so in Australia, which was a big surprise to me as they allow things like forcing pass and Wilcocz. But I had hoped that the rot didn’t extend any further.

[fromageGB]

I spent a little longer and found this, which is quite restrictive about methods:

Regulations for the control of conventions

I would ask the SABF and I wouldn't expect a positive reply.

I was curious about a regulation which seems contrary to that in other jurisdictions, so I read this to find:

"COMPETITIVE AUCTIONS

Any allowed method of competitive auction may be used, subject to the following requirements which are alertable:

... n/a ...

All doubles must be marked in the convention card. They need not be alerted unless using screens."

 

So all is well. It can mean what you like, but don't alert. (Contrary advice to that from PhilG007 and your stated idea)

 

(This sort of thing is not a bridge rule, so you won't find it in the rule book. Regulations are imposed by the national authority to make life miserable for their own players only.)

[PhilG007]

I was curious about a regulation which seems contrary to that in other jurisdictions, so I read this to find:

"COMPETITIVE AUCTIONS

Any allowed method of competitive auction may be used, subject to the following requirements which are alertable:

... n/a ...

All doubles must be marked in the convention card. They need not be alerted unless using screens."

 

So all is well. It can mean what you like, but don't alert. (Contrary advice to that from PhilG007 and your stated idea)

 

(This sort of thing is not a bridge rule, so you won't find it in the rule book. Regulations are imposed by the national authority to make life miserable for their own players only.)

If a bid between a partnership is pre-agreed as conventional(as it was in the OP),it is MANDATORY that it be alerted. Not to do so risks the

opponents being damaged and an adjusted score being awarded.

[Joe_Old]

Even in ACBL any meaning for double is allowed.

 

Not exactly true.

 

The ACBL's Basic Chart (which must be allowed in all club games), states that a double or an overcall of 1 NT showing multiple suits, must include at least one known suit (or 3 suits). Therefore, this treatment would not be allowed at club games, unless the club specifically sanctions it (the club's discretion).

 

However, the Mid Chart, sanctioned for higher level tournament play, does allow this treatment.

[Tramticket]

If a bid between a partnership is pre-agreed as conventional(as it was in the OP),it is MANDATORY that it be alerted. Not to do so risks the

opponents being damaged and an adjusted score being awarded.

 

Phil - For those of us who are less experienced in the details of the South African regulations, perhaps you could help us understand exactly where (section number) it states that "it is MANDATORY to be alerted". Thank you

[miamijd]

This is basically Meckwellian DONT. Allowed in all ACBL games to my knowledge (someone correct me if I'm wrong, but DONT is allowed in all ACBL games and no suit is known there, either).

 

Responder bids 2C over the X with most hands. Opener then:

 

Pass Club suit (not a moose)

2D Diamonds

2H hearts and spades (not a moose)

2S either a moose with majors or a very strong 2S overcall (take your pick of treatments)

2NT game forcing with major-minor two suiter

 

The other bids over 1NT are

2C clubs and a major

2D diamonds and a major

2H hearts

2S spades

2NT minors

3NT GF major two-suiter

 

Cheers,

mike

[Joe_Old]

This is basically Meckwellian DONT. Allowed in all ACBL games to my knowledge (someone correct me if I'm wrong, but DONT is allowed in all ACBL games and no suit is known there, either).

 

Responder bids 2C over the X with most hands. Opener then:

 

Pass Club suit (not a moose)

2D Diamonds

2H hearts and spades (not a moose)

2S either a moose with majors or a very strong 2S overcall (take your pick of treatments)

2NT game forcing with major-minor two suiter

 

The other bids over 1NT are

2C clubs and a major

2D diamonds and a major

2H hearts

2S spades

2NT minors

3NT GF major two-suiter

 

Cheers,

mike

 

The X is one suited, and that's what makes DONT permissible in the ACBL Basic Chart. With TWO suited bids one suit must be known.

 

Go to ACBL.org., then

tournaments, then

Charts, Rules and Regulations, then

Convention Charts.

 

Under the Basic Charts, "Allowed" and "Competitive"

 

3. NOTRUMP OVERCALL for either

a) two-suit takeout showing at least 5-4 distribution and at least one known suit or

b) three-suit takeout (at least three cards in each of three suits)

 

That is why DONT (and Landy and Cappeletti) are allowed and the proposed treatment is not. See my prior post regarding the club option to allow. Of course, it is permissible under the Mid Chart.

[miamijd]

The X is one suited, and that's what makes DONT permissible in the ACBL Basic Chart. With TWO suited bids one suit must be known.

 

Go to ACBL.org., then

tournaments, then

Charts, Rules and Regulations, then

Convention Charts.

 

Under the Basic Charts, "Allowed" and "Competitive"

 

3. NOTRUMP OVERCALL for either

a) two-suit takeout showing at least 5-4 distribution and at least one known suit or

b) three-suit takeout (at least three cards in each of three suits)

 

That is why DONT (and Landy and Cappeletti) are allowed and the proposed treatment is not. See my prior post regarding the club option to allow. Of course, it is permissible under the Mid Chart.

 

Ah, now I see the source of the disagreement. Your reading is not correct.

 

By "Notrump Overcall," the ACBL means just that -- an overcall of 1NT, 2NT, 3NT, or the like. It does not mean an overcall of the opponents' NT bid. What you quote allows an overcall of some number of NT to be a two-suited or three-suited takeout, but if two-suited, at least one suit must be known (for example, an overcall of 1NT after 1D showing clubs and a major rather than the more familiar clubs and hearts).

 

What you should have quoted was #7.b under COMPETITIVE:

 

7. DEFENSE TO:

a) conventional calls (except see #10 RESPONSES and REBIDS

above and #7 under DISALLOWED below),

b) natural no trump opening bids and overcalls, except that direct calls,

other than the following, must have at least one known suit.

- Double

- Two Clubs

- Two Diamonds showing a one suited hand in hearts or spades

c) opening bids of two clubs or higher.

 

Thus, any defense to a natural NT opening bid is permissible, but direct calls OTHER THAN X, 2C, and 2D Woolsey must show at least one known suit. The X does NOT have to show a known suit.

 

Indeed, if X had to show at least one known suit, DONT would be impermissible, since the DONT X does NOT show at least one known suit (it doesn't show ANY known suits). The fact that it is one-suited does not mean it shows a KNOWN suit.

 

Cheers,

Mike

[Joe_Old]

Ah, now I see the source of the disagreement. Your reading is not correct.

 

By "Notrump Overcall," the ACBL means just that -- an overcall of 1NT, 2NT, 3NT, or the like. It does not mean an overcall of the opponents' NT bid. What you quote allows an overcall of some number of NT to be a two-suited or three-suited takeout, but if two-suited, at least one suit must be known (for example, an overcall of 1NT after 1D showing clubs and a major rather than the more familiar clubs and hearts).

 

What you should have quoted was #7.b under COMPETITIVE:

 

7. DEFENSE TO:

a) conventional calls (except see #10 RESPONSES and REBIDS

above and #7 under DISALLOWED below),

b) natural no trump opening bids and overcalls, except that direct calls,

other than the following, must have at least one known suit.

- Double

- Two Clubs

- Two Diamonds showing a one suited hand in hearts or spades

c) opening bids of two clubs or higher.

 

Thus, any defense to a natural NT opening bid is permissible, but direct calls OTHER THAN X, 2C, and 2D Woolsey must show at least one known suit. The X does NOT have to show a known suit.

 

Indeed, if X had to show at least one known suit, DONT would be impermissible, since the DONT X does NOT show at least one known suit (it doesn't show ANY known suits). The fact that it is one-suited does not mean it shows a KNOWN suit.

 

Cheers,

Mike

 

That's why I'm not a Director. Thanks for (gently) clearing that up.

[Caitlynne]

The multi-meaning conventional Double of 1NT is fine in ACBL-land. However, strong means 15+ HCP or, if less than 15 HCP is possible, the range must be specifically defined and (typically) not span more than 5 HCP (e.g., 14 to 18 HCP would be okay, but 14 to 19 HCP would not).

[helene_t]

The multi-meaning conventional Double of 1NT is fine in ACBL-land. However, strong means 15+ HCP or, if less than 15 HCP is possible, the range must be specifically defined and (typically) not span more than 5 HCP (e.g., 14 to 18 HCP would be okay, but 14 to 19 HCP would not).

What Mike just quoted says than any meaning of dbl is allowed.

 

It may be true that you can't use the expression "strong" if it just means 13+ but that is matter of disclosure, not system regulation.

[msjennifer]

If the double of a 1NT by RHO shows special combinations alternatives then if the opponents are,by local rules, to be alerted one has to do so.But even if it is not compulsory it should be alerted I I,,personally, consider it nothing short of cheating if one does not alert .

[pescetom]

I was curious about a regulation which seems contrary to that in other jurisdictions, so I read this to find:

"COMPETITIVE AUCTIONS

Any allowed method of competitive auction may be used, subject to the following requirements which are alertable:

... n/a ...

All doubles must be marked in the convention card. They need not be alerted unless using screens."

 

So all is well. It can mean what you like, but don't alert. (Contrary advice to that from PhilG007 and your stated idea)

 

(This sort of thing is not a bridge rule, so you won't find it in the rule book. Regulations are imposed by the national authority to make life miserable for their own players only.)

 

SABF has already updated that, although the regulations have not yet changed, see My link:

 

Doubles not needing an alert: (unless playing with screens)

Any double during the first 8 calls of an auction is assumed to be for take-out, except a double

of NT opening which is deemed to be for penalties.

Any double after the first 8 calls of an auction that is penalty orientated.

Doubles needing an alert:

All other doubles including those that partially fall within the ambit of the above but carry an

additional special meaning which is a partnership agreement, e.g. support doubles, snapdragon

doubles etc.

 

So there seems to be no doubt that the double in discussion must be alerted.

 

BTW I think this regulation is considerably more practical and sensible than the analogous one of FIGB, I'll see if we can adopt it as club rules ;)

[pescetom]

Is this really “usual”? I knew it was the case in th ACBL, and recently heard it was so in Australia, which was a big surprise to me as they allow things like forcing pass and Wilcocz. But I had hoped that the rot didn’t extend any further.

 

It is the case here in Italy also, and the FIGB usually toes the EBL line on such matters (the Alert Procedures are almost a verbatim copy of WBF/EBL Alerting Policy, although I don't see an EBL document equivalent to the FIGB Systems Regulations which date 2010).