[jeremy69]

Quote

Thus, speaking as an untrained nerk who has to enforce this excuse for a regulation, I consider AKQxxxxxx and out as legal - technically.

1. You don't HAVE to enforce it. No club has to accept the OB regulations although I think they are wise to do so in general.
2. x QJ10xxxxxxx x x is undoubtedly 8 clearcut tricks but no-one would suggest this had "the values" normally associated with a one level opening. Although an extreme example you dfo'nt want this hand being described as strong, Benjamin or any other phrase that will put people off wading in over it.
3. I think most people would open a shapely (5-5+) 10 count so would allow any hand that met that criterion as well as the 8 clearcut tricks

Some deprecate the lack of a precise point count but even when a regulation is precisely framed e.g. clear cut tricks this still leads to vigorous debate about exactly what it means when, irrespective of whether one agrees or not, it is, to my mind, completely clear.

[jeremy69]

Quote

In EBU-land, the Orange Book (Paras 11C1 and 11C9) provides that the minimum requirement for opening 1 of a suit is 11 HCP or - at Level 2 - Rule of 19 and - at Levels 3&4 - Rule of 18 (subject in either case to a minimum of 8 HCP). Thus, any hand with a nine card suit and at least 8 HCP may be opened one of that suit.

I don't agree with this. I would not consider opening at the one level on an 8 or 9 count with some distribution normal. All thi is saying, in my view, is that you can't use the fact that a hand conforms to the rule of 18 or 19 if it does not also meet the minimum of 8 points.

[phil_20686]

jeremy69, on 2010-November-05, 04:48, said:

I don't agree with this. I would not consider opening at the one level on an 8 or 9 count with some distribution normal. All thi is saying, in my view, is that you can't use the fact that a hand conforms to the rule of 18 or 19 if it does not also meet the minimum of 8 points.

everyone I know (who plays acol) would think that AKQTxx xx xx xxx was too strong to be opened 2s and must be opened 1s. So I think opening some 9 counts at the 1 level is completely "normal" at the level of advanced players.

Moreover, if you play precision an "opening bid" is generally defined to be about 10HCP, and some 9's will be opened routinely. Why should you consider an "openeing bid" as applying only to acol? Somewhere like Italy a 9 or ten HCP opening of 1M would be the majority field action.

[jeremy69]

phil_20686, on 2010-November-05, 05:41, said:

everyone I know (who plays acol) would think that AKQTxx xx xx xxx was too strong to be opened 2s and must be opened 1s. So I think opening some 9 counts at the 1 level is completely "normal" at the level of advanced players.

Moreover, if you play precision an "opening bid" is generally defined to be about 10HCP, and some 9's will be opened routinely. Why should you consider an "opening bid" as applying only to acol? Somewhere like Italy a 9 or ten HCP opening of 1M would be the majority field action.

Many who play Weak Two's around the country play it as 6-10.
Whilst some would certainly regard the hand as too strong it is worth remembering that the original Ogust meaning for 2S 2NT 3NT was AKQxxx and out.
The regulations are not made for advanced players but all players and a nine count is not normal
We are not in Italy nor writing our regulations for Italians.
Traditional Precision is 11-15 although the more aggressive will open some 10 counts. No reason why the definition of opening should not apply to all systems. not just Acol and it does.

[NickRW]

jeremy69, on 2010-November-05, 04:42, said:

1. You don't HAVE to enforce it. No club has to accept the OB regulations although I think they are wise to do so in general.
2. x QJ10xxxxxxx x x is undoubtedly 8 clearcut tricks but no-one would suggest this had "the values" normally associated with a one level opening. Although an extreme example you dfo'nt want this hand being described as strong, Benjamin or any other phrase that will put people off wading in over it.
3. I think most people would open a shapely (5-5+) 10 count so would allow any hand that met that criterion as well as the 8 clearcut tricks

Some deprecate the lack of a precise point count but even when a regulation is precisely framed e.g. clear cut tricks this still leads to vigorous debate about exactly what it means when, irrespective of whether one agrees or not, it is, to my mind, completely clear.

Well, I do have to try to enforce it as the club does not attempt to produce its own regulations.

I appreciate the, to my mind, very easy to understand definition of clear cut tricks. It is true that people can still find room for debate, but, as a TD, I make my ruling, which I feel sure enough about, and any query of it would be met with "speak to the appeal committee".

On the hcp requirement, I definitely do not feel that I am on any kind of firm ground and the wording of the regulation is literally no help whatsoever.

Nick

[bluejak]

Cascade, on 2010-November-04, 15:28, said:

Perhaps the ludicrousness is that some think these things should be regulated which only seems to lead to silly rules.

Your saying so many times over the years with no explanation or justification does not help. Any rules will have borderline cases: it is silly to assume that makes the rules wrong.

No doubt you believe that because a different jurisdiction with different history and different general approaches and different feelings in their average and weak players has a less restrictive approach proves that somewhere else should do the same. I find such an argument completely unconvincing.

[bluejak]

campboy, on 2010-November-03, 18:32, said:

I would think 11+ would be more logical than 12+, since you are permitted to open one of a suit by agreement on any hand with 11 points, and it is the smallest such integer. Happily this is also -- provided we are considering first or second seat openers -- independent of the level of permitted agreements. The case for 8+ presumably is the corresponding statement with "some" rather than "any".

The WBU uses the EBU Orange book. The WBU L&EC have interpreted 'the minimum highcard strength associated with an opening bid' [quoted from memory so sorry if not quite correct] as 11 HCP. This will appear in the latest WBU L&EC minutes when published.

Of course, this does not apply in England, but it solves the matter for Welsh TDs.