UK laws on 1NT

[etha]

Just discovered I may be breaking the rules. Note I am in the UK. I am playing a 14-16NT. If I sometimes open these with a singleton I just discovered they are alertable. Now if my partner who never opens these with a singleton bids 1NT is that alertable and what do I write on the CC.

[Cyberyeti]

Just discovered I may be breaking the rules. Note I am in the UK. I am playing a 14-16NT. If I sometimes open these with a singleton I just discovered they are alertable. Now if my partner who never opens these with a singleton bids 1NT is that alertable and what do I write on the CC.

 

If you're in England, you announce "14-16 may contain a singleton".

 

You are supposed to play the same system as your partner, so either you agree to open it with a singleton or you don't.

[etha]

thanks. Ok so playing the same system as someone means making the same bids they do with the same hands ? I am not allowed to think I want to open this hand with a singleton which I know my partner won't ?

 

It seems worse to agree we can have a singleton but not tell the opponents partner can't have one, Or to play we can't have a singleton but occasionally bid 1NT with one.

[Cyberyeti]

thanks. Ok so playing the same system as someone means making the same bids they do with the same hands ? I am not allowed to think I want to open this hand with a singleton which I know my partner won't ?

 

It seems worse to agree we can have a singleton but not tell the opponents partner can't have one, Or to play we can't have a singleton but occasionally bid 1NT with one.

 

Not exactly. I think where an announcement is involved you need to know whether your partnership agreement is that you do it with a singleton or not. I'd be inclined to announce "may contain a singleton, but that's more likely if I open it than when he does" or the reverse, but no doubt Gordon will say you shouldn't do this.

[barmar]

thanks. Ok so playing the same system as someone means making the same bids they do with the same hands ?

Not necessarily. If your system allows for multiple bids with the same hand, you can each use your own judgement, and players can have different styles, different levels of aggression, etc.. Just because you've agreed that you're allowed to open 1NT with a singleton, it doesn't mean you have to do it.

 

My partner and I have different styles when we're 4-4 in the minors. He usually opens 1♣, I usually open 1♦. We're still playing the same system.

[Vampyr]

Or to play we can't have a singleton but occasionally bid 1NT with one.

 

This really depends on what “occasionally” means to you.

[pescetom]

My partner and I have different styles when we're 4-4 in the minors. He usually opens 1♣, I usually open 1♦. We're still playing the same system.

I think that is pushing the concept of style too far.

But again, over to Gordontd and the experts.

[barmar]

I think that is pushing the concept of style too far.

But again, over to Gordontd and the experts.

Our convention card just says that each of these bids shows 3+ cards in the suit. There's nothing on the ACBL CC that says anything about which you bid when you have a choice.

 

Another case: In the auction 1♣ 1♦ 1NT I'm more likely to bypass 4-card majors to bid 1NT than he is (we play Walsh style, so 1♦ usually denies a major unless responder has invitational+ strength). If the opponents ask about such an auction, we'll disclose this tendency difference, but I don't think it requires a proactive alert.

[pescetom]

Our convention card just says that each of these bids shows 3+ cards in the suit. There's nothing on the ACBL CC that says anything about which you bid when you have a choice.

ACBL hears a different drum, but it is pretty odd that there is no obligation to clearly define the inferences from a 1 of a suit opening, or that the definition can depend on which partner opens. In most RAs you would already be in violation of the rules if you failed to alert (or announce) a 1♦ opening that does not deny clubs of equal length, however common that agreement might be.

[nige1]

Just discovered I may be breaking the rules. Note I am in the UK. I am playing a 14-16NT. If I sometimes open these with a singleton I just discovered they are alertable. Now if my partner who never opens these with a singleton bids 1NT is that alertable and what do I write on the CC.

 

IMO,

• If you open 1N with a singleton but partner won't, then, arguably, those are treatments.
• Treatments should be disclosable.
• Hence partner should announce "might have a singleton" but you shouldn't.

This seems to be a grey area, without clear guidelines. Yet another candidate for rule rationalization.

[steve2005]

. In most RAs you would already be in violation of the rules if you failed to alert (or announce) a 1♦ opening that does not deny clubs of equal length, however common that agreement might be.

One citation of a regulation would be nice.

 

Only one I deal with ACBL no alert would be required.

[marklaf]

In Japan you are allowed to open 1nt with a singleton A or K or Q--otherwise it is forbidden

[dsLawsd]

ACBL allows 1 NT with A,K, Q.

 

One of the main problems with 1partner only can do is that it creates so many ethical issues involving Unauthorized Information that can lead to discipline or at least a severe playing penalty that might lead to an issue with your reputation.

 

Play one system binding on the partnership: and in certain situations whereby partner would GENUINELY not suspect that you have deviated from your treatment based on looking at your hand (and any future problems in the the auction that you anticipate). Doing something frequently causes the presumption that there is partnership knowledge.

 

You should ask whoever is the authority in the UK of course about specific situations...

 

(ACBL CERTIFIED CLUB DIRECTOR)

[Tramticket]

If you're in England, you announce "14-16 may contain a singleton".

 

Correct.

 

I must admit that I find the test "May Contain a Singleton" to be a pretty high hurdle.

 

In my main partnership I have bid 1NT with a singleton exactly once (and partner has never to my knowledge bid 1NT with a singleton). The one time that I bid 1NT with a singleton, I held a 4441 hand (playing a weak NT and four-card majors) with a singleton club, a 13-count and soft, NT-type values. This is a difficult hand for the system - if I open 1♥ (or 1♠) and rebid 2♦, I guarantee a five-card heart (or spade) suit. I could open 1♦ and rebid 2♦ over a 2♣ response (choosing to lie in the minor rather than the major). This is an improvement but it is hardly ideal to pretend to hold a single-suited diamond hand. With 12 points I might pass, with 14 points I might upgrade, but with this specific hand I chose to open 1NT. In discussing the hands at halfway (in a Swiss teams), I mentioned to partner that I had chosen to open 1NT on hand X. She looked at the hand-record, shrugged and said "yes, I see what you mean".

 

So I have now made the bid and discussed with partner. Do we now have an agreement (explicit or implicit) that "we may open with a singleton". Should we be announcing this? I feel that this would be an unhelpful announcement! Our response structure does not make any allowance for the possibility of a singleton.

 

On the other hand, I know of partnerships who treat any 4441 shape as balanced and will regularly open 1NT with this shape (and have responses geared to catering for this possibility). I would certainly want to be informed of this possibility.

[gordontd]

I think that is pushing the concept of style too far.

But again, over to Gordontd and the experts.

The Blue Book says:

 

3 D Matters of style

3 D 1 If a partnership has understandings such as opening lighter in third and/or fourth position or

overcalling on four card suits, these should be disclosed on the system card.

3 D 2 If a partnership agrees to make take-out doubles of suit bids on almost all hands with opening

bid values including length in opener’s suit, this should be disclosed on the system card.

Similarly the practice of doubling for take-out on unusually weak hands should be marked on

the front of the system card.

3 D 3 Members of a partnership may play a different style from each other, for example while

opening pre-empts one player may take more liberties with suit quality than the other. Any

relevant information about style should be explained in answer to a question, and, where

appropriate, disclosed on the system card.

 

I think that would cover which minor to open with 4-4, especially in an Acol setting where there seems to be so much variation and it's not infrequent for a pair not even to have discussed this.

[gordontd]

Not exactly. I think where an announcement is involved you need to know whether your partnership agreement is that you do it with a singleton or not. I'd be inclined to announce "may contain a singleton, but that's more likely if I open it than when he does" or the reverse, but no doubt Gordon will say you shouldn't do this.

The aim of announcing and alerting is to try to give your opponents as much information as is useful, so in general more is more. In this instance you might vary your announcements slightly so that one of you says "...may contain a singleton" while the other says "...may very rarely contain a singleton". Note that this has just come out of my head and is not an official position.

[etha]

OK thanks

[pescetom]

One citation of a regulation would be nice.

 

WBF Systems Policy, Appendix 3:

Policy

The following classes of calls should be alerted:

1. Conventional bids should be alerted, non-conventional bids should not.

2. Those bids which have special meanings or which are based on or lead to special

understandings between the partners.

 

This is still the backbone of the Alert policy of many RAs - alert anything that is not natural or has hidden meanings. Of course the perception of what is natural or not is in part linked to specific bridge culture, in this case how rigidly or not suits are bid up the line in the traditional national systems.

[gordontd]

In most RAs you would already be in violation of the rules if you failed to alert (or announce) a 1♦ opening that does not deny clubs of equal length, however common that agreement might be.

I wonder if you meant something different to what you wrote? Surely you aren't saying it's alertable to open 1D when 4-4 in the minors?

[661_Pete]

In our club all 1NT openers should be announced - which is rather pointless since every pair I've met invariably plays 12-14 - but it's the rule. Sometimes I forget to announce - and get pulled up for it! Stayman and transfer replies must also be announced of course.

 

Although I've never played the system described in the OP, I sometimes wish I could open 1NT on 14 points with a singleton. 4-4-4-1 is my least favourite shape (probably everyone else's, too!) especially if the singleton is a major. I bid a suit; partner needless to say responds with that major - then what do I do?

[Tramticket]

In our club all 1NT openers should be announced - which is rather pointless since every pair I've met invariably plays 12-14 - but it's the rule.

 

Your club is free to change the requirements on announcements. But I wouldn't advise this, since you and other players at your club, will be better prepared to play in County or EBU competitions if you are familiar with the EBU regulations.

 

4-4-4-1 is my least favourite shape (probably everyone else's, too!) especially if the singleton is a major. I bid a suit; partner needless to say responds with that major - then what do I do?

 

If the singleton is a heart, then you can open 1m and rebid spades. This suggests a five-card minor, but partner will usually investigate other strains before leaping in the minor, so there is usually little damage.

 

If the singleton is a spade you will normally open 1♦ and rebid 2♣ over a 1♠ response. The danger is that your partner has responded 1♠ with five spades and four hearts. It can now be difficult to unearth a 4-4 heart fit, due to the murkiness of 4th suit forcing. I would certainly advise that you agree that a raise of the 4th suit should show a four-card suit. So in the sequence:

 

1♦, 1♠; 2♣, 2♥; 3♥

 

the 2♥ bid is 4th suit forcing (says nothing about the heart suit), but the 3♥ bid shows a four-card heart suit.

[Cyberyeti]

In our club all 1NT openers should be announced - which is rather pointless since every pair I've met invariably plays 12-14 - but it's the rule. Sometimes I forget to announce - and get pulled up for it! Stayman and transfer replies must also be announced of course.

 

Although I've never played the system described in the OP, I sometimes wish I could open 1NT on 14 points with a singleton. 4-4-4-1 is my least favourite shape (probably everyone else's, too!) especially if the singleton is a major. I bid a suit; partner needless to say responds with that major - then what do I do?

 

When I play in my VERY occasional strong club partnership we agree that 4414s only are opened 1N (so that the old fashioned short diamonds 2♦ bid always has 5 clubs).

 

You open the right suit so you have a sensible rebid.

[steve2005]

2. Those bids which have special meanings or which are based on or lead to special

understandings between the partners.

If you interpret this to mean 1C has to be alerted if can be done with 4-4 in minors then I would say practically every bid has a special understanding and almost all bids alertable by this interpretation.

 

sometimes opening 1C with 4-4 in minors just isn't special.

 

Is there an alert regulation or a case ruling? out there that says if you open 1C with 4-4 in minor. The ACBL alert regulation make no mention of this case in their reference material.

[msjennifer]

Sir,one of our opponents ,who played 14/16 NT and may have a singleton, opened 1NT holding A-A-AQxxx-xxxxxx.Since I am not a quarrelling type did not call the director as there was no nonplaying director available.I would like to know "Is this permissible under the existing laws" When I asked the person he said "this is not in our system but it is not binding on me to follow the system so long as my partner is totally ignorant of it and responds normally."

[nige1]

IMO,

• If you open 1N with a singleton but partner won't, then, arguably, those are treatments.
• Treatments should be disclosable.
• Hence partner should announce "might have a singleton" but you shouldn't.

This seems to be a grey area, without clear guidelines. Yet another candidate for rule rationalization.

I apologize for mistakenly maligning the EBU that has implemented what I feel are sensible regulations, according to GordonTD:

3 D Matters of style

3 D 1 If a partnership has understandings such as opening lighter in third and/or fourth position or overcalling on four card suits, these should be disclosed on the system card.

3 D 2 If a partnership agrees to make take-out doubles of suit bids on almost all hands with opening bid values including length in opener's suit, this should be disclosed on the system card.Similarly the practice of doubling for take-out on unusually weak hands should be marked on the front of the system card.

3 D 3 Members of a partnership may play a different style from each other, for example while opening pre-empts one player may take more liberties with suit quality than the other. Anyr elevant information about style should be explained in answer to a question, and, where appropriate, disclosed on the system card.