PDA

View Full Version : Systems Woes (or whoas)


eokkoe
17-02-06, 12:31 PM
As we prepare to send forth OzOne pairs to compete in the best events available, we can't ignore the fact that Moscito-based systems are going to create problems for us, maybe bigger ones than for the opponents.

The issue is being permitted to use them. Both ACBL and WBF will be inclined to bar them from pair events and perhaps short-board-round team events like the Reisinger and open BAM, maybe even Swisses. And the Cavendish will be even less keen to allow them. Why? Well, apart from a hopelessly irrational fear of the unknown, there are the real issues of (a) delaying each round just long enough for pre-alerts and explanations to put the table in danger of falling hopelessly behind; (b) creating at least the appearance of leaving the opponents at a disadvantage due to unfamiliarity; and (c) when adding in the time to explain relay auctions, permitting Moscito will strike event organizers as bad for the game.

Even if we can convince organizers to carry explanations and defenses in therir Daily Bulletins and/or pre-circulate needed info on these methods, this is too hit-and-miss to satisfy the need or perceived need for full and timely disclosure.

Thus, we have to be prepared to accept grim reality that Moscito won't be allowed in important events other than the Bermuda Bowl and its Zonal qualifying playoffs and certain more liberal special tournaments.

If this is so, it's not too soon for us to start developing strong and resourceful systems that we can play everywhere. Moscito might evolve into strong club cum canape or something like Roman Club with one-bids forcing, or we might go natural and scientific. In any case, it's ostrich-like for us to pretend the issue will just go away and all will be well.

As both Dallas and the Cavendish are shortly upon us, and we have not yet received replies from relevant sponsoring organizations, we're behaving more hopefully than rationally in pretending we can just go and play.

Gentlemen, please consider alternatives.

phm
18-02-06, 04:12 PM
Does anyone have a good idea off the top of their head which of these is currently legal?
1. Submarine openings
2. Transfer responses
3. Single strong bid responses (EG 1D:1H is any game force or a hand of 6-11 HCP with no long suit, no 4S and no 3H.)
4. Relay bidding in a GF

paul

eokkoe
20-02-06, 05:10 AM
I believe that 2 and 4 are no problem, that 1 has a chance for approval with explanation and good defense submitted and that 3 may be harder to sell the authorities than 1. This is indeed "top of the head" response.

David Morgan
21-02-06, 11:07 PM
It's not just the Moscito players who will have to look at their methods: the ACBL midchart requires two-level openings that show a weak two-suiter to promise at least 5-4 (so watch out Tony and Sartaj!). They also prohibit any psyching of conventional calls (so that is not available as a reason). The ACBL's (parochial and restrictive) system regulations can eb found at http://www.acbl.org/documentLibrary/units/convChart12_03.pdf

David

arian
22-02-06, 09:35 AM
Perhaps the weak 2 problem can be got around by saying that a weak 2 promises either a 6 card suit or a 5 card suit with a 4 card minor (as with 5/4 majors Hans/Nunn open 2C). This then only causes problems if you want to open a weak 2 with a 5332.

Arian