Tartan 2's, Multi 2D NZ & ACBL

[jillybean]

Where does Multi 2D 2 way, and 3 way, and Tartan 2's sit on the CC ?

 

In NZ, and in ACBL land?

 

I believe Multi is permitted at Intermediate tournaments in NZ, but not Junior.

What are the rules at Club games?

 

Thanks.

[hrothgar]

Where does Multi 2D 2 way, and 3 way, and Tartan 2's sit on the CC ?

 

In NZ, and in ACBL land?

 

I believe Multi is permitted at Intermediate tournaments in NZ, but not Junior.

What are the rules at Club games?

 

Thanks.

 

Could you please define what you mean by Tartan Two bids (because I've heard a bunch of different stuff described as such)

 

These are almost certainly banned at the Basic and Basic+ level.

Even at the level of the Open Chart, you're going to run into issues with the following under disallowed

 

11. *** A non-Forcing 2-level opening bid in first or second seat that has a Range of greater

than 9 HCP and could show less than Average Strength.

 

With respect to multi, you can only use this in events using the Open+ chart. Even here you're going to have problems if the rounds are less than 6 boards

 

Disallowed

 

7. In segments of fewer than 6 boards, an Artificial opening Preempt below 3NT that does

not show at least one known suit.

[AL78]

Could you please define what you mean by Tartan Two bids (because I've heard a bunch of different stuff described as such)

 

The version I played was EBU level 4 legal:

 

2♥: 5-5 weak hearts and a minor or Acol 2 in hearts or 20-21 balanced.

2♠: 5-5 weak spades and another or Acol 2 in spades.

 

Responses:

2♥ - 2♠ asks for the hand type. 2NT = strong bal, 3m = weak 5-5, 3♥ = Acol 2 in hearts.

2♠ - 2NT asks for the hand type. New suit = weak 5-5, 3♠ = Acol 2 in spades.

[mycroft]

Those die to what Hrothgar mentioned (Open, disallowed, 11; Open+, disallowed, 13). Not allowed at all in the ACBL. Open+ would be fine with "weak 2 in hearts (optionally, + another suit) or *Strong 2* in hearts or 20-21 BAL", but I don't think Acol 2 counts as "Very strong".

 

 

“Very Strong”: A hand that contains:

i. at least 20 HCP; or

ii. at least 14 HCP and is within one trick of game assuming suits break evenly among the other hands.

iii. at least 5 Control Points and is within one trick of game assuming suits break evenly among the other hands.

 

 

Oddly enough, I think everyone would be *happy* to allow this, but the words say no. It's really aimed at agreements without the obvious break that "weak 2 or Acol 2" gives you, but the break required seems to just be bigger than needed here. On the other hand, they've got to put a line somewhere, and wherever they put it would cause some problems.

[mycroft]

Remember everybody, that "Multi is an *exception* to the rules, grandfathered in because it's too embedded in too many players' systems." (Note: by players, I don't mean North Americans :-). Any arguments that "this is no harder than Multi" is more likely to get Multi's exception removed than your pet transfer preempt allowed (as non-Brown Sticker, or at all, depending on RA). Not likely to either, frankly, I will admit.

 

As a primarily ACBL player, I don't have a dog in this fight, because I know where we stand on non-Strong Artificial openings (transfers or otherwise), so the last time I played one was 1998 (Multi 2♦, Ekren 2♥, 2♠ spades+minor, all 1-7 - that wasn't the hard part to defend against, frankly).

 

Not completely relevant to this thread, but between here and BW...

[jillybean]

Could you please define what you mean by Tartan Two bids (because I've heard a bunch of different stuff described as such)

 

 

The basic description of "Tartan" here is Strong with a Major (4+) or weak Major + Minor

[pescetom]

Remember everybody, that "Multi is an *exception* to the rules, grandfathered in because it's too embedded in too many players' systems." (Note: by players, I don't mean North Americans :-). Any arguments that "this is no harder than Multi" is more likely to get Multi's exception removed than your pet transfer preempt allowed (as non-Brown Sticker, or at all, depending on RA).

I'm no fan of exceptions in general, or this exception in particular.

Having said that, the majority of competitive players in Italy play some kind of Multi (and the minority doesn't seem to mind, even if few of them have an effective defence against it).

The RA allows it at any level, but a club can set its own rules about this or any other agreement (very rare that they do).

[Cascade]

Be aware that there are several pairs and players in New Zealand that misdescribe openings that show five of the major bid and five (or perhaps four or more) of an undisclosed minor and a weak hand of about 6-9 hcp as a "Tartan Two". The misnaming is less common than it used to be but so are real Tartan Twos. I would always ask for clarification if I heard "Tartan Two".

[Douglas43]

The basic description of "Tartan" here is Strong with a Major (4+) or weak Major + Minor

 

I believe that Tartan twos are as described above by AL78 (based on an old book by Ron Klinger)

[AL78]

I believe that Tartan twos are as described above by AL78 (based on an old book by Ron Klinger)

 

And here:

 

http://www.acblunit390.org/Simon/tartan2.htm

[paulg]

From the original (February 1999) WBF Guide to Completion of the WBF Convention Card:

 

TARTAN TWO-BIDS -

 

Multi-meaning opening bids of 2♥ and 2♠ that show either an Acol two-bid in the suit named, or a hand with 5-9 HCP, at least five cards in the suit named and at least five cards in a second, unspecified suit.

 

 

 

I think a traditional Acol two-bid, being a hand of power and quality, would qualify as 'Very Strong' in the ACBL (allowing Tartan Twos to be permitted in ACBL Open+ events). However this presumption is undermined by the EBU's crusade on full disclosure on this issue, as so many (club) players are calling hands Acol two-bids even though they lack one or both of these criteria.

 

If the bids are always weak, showing 5+ major with unspecified second suit, then they would be permitted in all ACBL events.

[mycroft]

Do check the second and third parameters of "Very Strong". "Power" should be fine; "Quality" needs to meet "within one trick of game given even breaks". I would assume that people playing this would know (but given the number of non-NA pro players who play Multi in pairs events in the ACBL, "should" is pulling some weight here); but I also assume that there will be sticklers who know the Open+ chart and who are not particularly happy with playing against non-GCC conventions (*), so will call players on it if they fudge the requirements.

 

[non-bracketed: a]t a Regional (including regional events at an NABC):

● applies in any 3+-session event with no masterpoint limit;

● applies in any 2-session event with no masterpoint limit as long as there

is a 2-session event of the same type with a masterpoint limit on the same day

Nationally Rated Events: applies in any NABC event with no masterpoint limit, and any NABC event with an upper masterpoint limit above 6000.

 

[bracketed: ]Top bracket (regardless of team masterpoint holdings), and any other bracket where the lowest team averages more than 3000 masterpoints per player.

Note: in Penticton, my memory is that bottom of bracket 2 is ~8000, so no Open+ there.

 

(*) Not a mistype or mismemory. They are *not* happy with the Open Chart, because people are playing things they don't know. And with so few actually using the freedom to play stuff they weren't before, they get to remain annoyed about it for much longer, because it's only one or two a session that are "ruining the beauty of this game".

[jillybean]

Be aware that there are several pairs and players in New Zealand that misdescribe openings that show five of the major bid and five (or perhaps four or more) of an undisclosed minor and a weak hand of about 6-9 hcp as a "Tartan Two". The misnaming is less common than it used to be but so are real Tartan Twos. I would always ask for clarification if I heard "Tartan Two".

Yes, thanks. I have noted players use a convention name and are reluctant to disclose their actual agreements, but rather state "I understand the bid as..." (club bridge)

I must have annoyed one opponent when I asked about a double of our 1nt opening, he said "It's an ACOL double !!". When I said, sorry, I don't play ACOL his reply was "Well, it's about time you learned".

 

I asked this question because I am learning Multi with one partner and don't want to run afoul of the regulations.

"Tartan" although rare, I've seen used with 54 hands but it's not a fight I'm going to start.

[blackshoe]

If someone said to me, in explaining his partnership understanding, "I understand the bid as..." I would listen politely, thank him, and ask "what is your partner's understanding of this bid?"

 

If someone said to me, "well it's about time you learned" regarding Acol (note: not all caps) or anything else, I'd respond "you're entitled to your wrong opinion, now tell me what the double means". If he does anything other than precisely that, I'd call the director.