[Sevogle]

My partner wants to play a system where if he opens in 3rd seat, he could have 4 to 6 pts or a full opener. He'd prefer do it with 0 - 6 pts. If he passes in 3rd seat he has 7 to 12 pts. If he opens and 4th seat bids, he does not want me to bid. If 4th seat passes, I can't very well leave him there and I'm forced to guess what he has for points or length. His whole purpose is to interfere with dealer's bid because if first and 2nd seat pass and he only has 4-6 pts in 3rd seat; he believes that the dealer always has to have a monster.

Is anyone aware of what system he is referring to? What do you see as the upside and downside to this type of bid? Is there a pt range restriction on opening in 3rd seat? ( One level opening used to be 13-19 which is a range of 7 and a weak two opening was said to have a range limit of 7)

[mikeh]

Afaik, he’s not referring to a specific ‘system’. He’s basically making it up.

Many, many years ago I played a method in which, if not vulnerable against vulnerable opps, we opened any hand with 0-4 hcp in first or third seat. We pre-alerted at each table, and I 5bink it would be unethical not to do so, even if you alerted his third seat opening bid and/or had a clearly marked convention card.

It was fun back in the day, but I wouldn’t play it these days.

As for your partner’s proposal, I truly don’t like it

You definitely don’t want to have to pass in third seat with very many 12 counts nor a lot of 11 counts, and virtually every good player opens with a nice 10 count with spades. Passing in third chair with, say, KQ10xx AQxx xx xx is, imo, losing bridge. I don’t know anyone who’d pass with KQ10xx AJxx xx xx

As for forcing you to pass if he opens in third seat and fourth seat bids…..wow! Of course he may have the weak hand but what if he has a normal hand? Or a good hand? You pass and second seat raises the interference. You’re screwed..partner has no idea whether you have anything or any fit.

Also, if you want to play ‘mandatory psyches’ in third seat, your range is way too wide. He has 7….why does he infer that 4th seat has a ‘monster’? Can’t the hcp be 10-10-7-13 around the table? And in what universe does his holding 7 hcp mean they have a game?

If you do what we did…cap it at 4 hcp, then on a bad day the hcp are 10-10-4-16 and now they usually have game.

[DavidKok]

It's also worth pointing out that this is a HUM (Highly Unusual Method). This is because you are playing a forcing pass first seat, your third seat pass shows more values than an opening bid (in the same seat) and you are opening at the 1-level on fewer than 8 points. Generally HUM's are restricted by local regulations and require additional disclosure, so make sure to verify what those are.

[mycroft]

Well, according to the system, it's not a forcing pass - partner could pass with 7-12. Still a HUM, though, and "random openings" (that do not promose 8 HCP and "for which no further definition is provided") are disallowed completely, at least in the WBF.

I assume by "dealer" OP means "fourth seat" - remember dealer gets to call first. What your partner is saying is certainly true, and many regulating authorities relax the point restrictions of allowed opening calls to reflect the desire to "get in first" (for instance, in Open/Open+ play in the ACBL, there is no minimum strength requirement for a Natural 1-level suit bid in third seat - so if partner is willing to require 3 cards for 1♣ or 1♦ or 4 cards for 1♥ or 1♠, the agreement (0-6 or 12+) is legal. Probably impossible to handle, but legal.[*])

Note that "requirements to pass in competition" have their own issues to manage, especially if partner "decided to psych" their "Natural" 1♥ call with 4=1=4=4 and a 2-count.

David and I are warning you about the issues with legality of the system; Mike is warning you about the difficulty in playing such a system, and recommending that working on your constructive auctions will pay off better in the long run than trying to impede the opponents with the rare ultra-weak hands. He's right.

[*]for those that care (Sam Dinkin and two other people in the ACBL), the Open/+ restriction on "opening pass that could be stronger than 1-bid with the same shape" also only applies in the first two seats. Again, no barrier to "0-6 or 12+". And joy of joys, it's neither pre-Alertable ('only difference is...Opening Bid strength') nor Alertable. Not entirely certain how the opponents are going to know to handle this. I agree with Mike that not doing so, despite what the Alert Chart makes clear is intended, is ethically questionable at best.

[steve2005]

System is unplayable. For reasons already mentioned and not mentioned.

[blackshoe]

mycroft, on 2023-January-31, 19:36, said:

[*]for those that care (Sam Dinkin and two other people in the ACBL), the Open/+ restriction on "opening pass that could be stronger than 1-bid with the same shape" also only applies in the first two seats. Again, no barrier to "0-6 or 12+". And joy of joys, it's neither pre-Alertable ('only difference is...Opening Bid strength') nor Alertable. Not entirely certain how the opponents are going to know to handle this. I agree with Mike that not doing so, despite what the Alert Chart makes clear is intended, is ethically questionable at best.

Hm. If the ethics of a game are defined by its rules, then I don't think you can call this situation "ethically questionable". If the ethics of a game are not defined by its rules then how do people play Diplomacy (for one example)?

That said, I agree that it would be better if the rules required some more proactive way of telling opps what you're doing than just writing it on the system card.

[mycroft]

I wouldn't know.

But in this particular case, I have raised this with the committees responsible for the regulations. And I have made it very clear that the change to remove the minimum strength requirement for 1-suit bids in third seat is probably a good thing for Open+, but shouldn't have been moved to Open (because that's what "everybody" plays). And I know why it was despite my (and others') objection. And one of these days, some BW Expert player is going to hit the pair that play "0-6 or 13+" third seat 1♥ openers, who will *correctly and to the regulations* neither Pre-Alert nor Alert the call, get talked out of slam, and hit the ever-loving roof. And I will hear about it. And I will smile, just a little. And the committee will adjust the regulations to be a little more sane, while still keeping the surprise not requiring Alerts for the experts "normal bidding".