[David Stevenson]

This is not as easy a question to answer as it seems!  It really depends what happened. A pure gambling 3N shows a 7/8 card solid minor (AKQ) and “nothing” outside.  But it is quite normal for nothing to include a few odd queens and jacks. So if the player had

Q

Jxx

Qx

AKQJxxx

I would say that is a normal gambling 3N.  However it is not normal to have an outside king. But to add to the complication it is also quite normal to vary preempts in third position: this is considered “general bridge knowledge”.  So if their agreement is to have no king but he decided to open this one with an outside king or even an ace because he was third in hand that is also acceptable.

So a director would need to find out exactly what their agreement is and whether that agreement comes under what is generally accepted for a gambling 3N. Without seeing the hand I think it quite likely that there was no misinformation. But I cannot be sure.

[David Stevenson]

It is an unfortunate fact that some players have their own idea of rules and tell opponents what the rules are which are often, as in this case, completely incorrect. First of all the Fishing Club, while very old-fashioned now, is certainly a recognised method.  It is really a development of the Vienna Club which was played with some success just before and after the Second World War. When I was young it was fairly common and I think I may have played it at school.

But the permitted methods in English and Welsh bridge are very wide, allowing a lot of latitude and it is perfectly permitted to invent a system and play it so long as it falls within the rules set out by the English Bridge Union. In practice most players play a system that is based on Acol with four card majors, or five card majors, or Two over one (five card majors with a 2/1 response game forcing), or five card spades and four card hearts, or a strong club. Five card majors or 2/1 might be based on better minor or a short club. But while that is seven different systems there are all sorts of deviations within those!
The real answer to the question you asked is that it is perfectly permissible to play a system of your own invention even if no one has heard of it so long as it is permitted by the EBU regulations. It is also, of course, permitted to play systems and conventions that your opponents have not heard of, again so long as they are legal.

[David Stevenson]

Standard Acol (not that there really is such a thing) refers to the basic meaning of bids, not the judgement of which bid to make. I would normally open 1H with 7 hearts and 10 points (and would have 30 years ago as well! ????) but I find it incredible that you were left in it. Someone’s bidding was a bit strange!

[David Stevenson]

Acol means a basic system with four card majors and fairly light two over ones, ie 1S – 2C shows 8+, 9+ or 10+ according to style. It does not make any difference what twos you play.

Benjy Acol is playing Acol with Benjy Twos, ie 2C is a strong hand with at least 8 playing tricks or a strong balanced hand and 2D is a very strong balanced hand or a game force based on high card strength.

If you play three weak twos then you are playing Acol with three weak twos and if you play Acol Twos then you are playing Acol with Acol Twos.

[David Stevenson]

There is in many ways a lack of understanding of the rules of bridge. Hand evaluation is an example. For many people the point count is sacrosanct, for other people (including better players) the point count is a guide. You will always get people who think it unfair if you have evaluated a hand differently from what they would do. One problem is that people tell you what do you do is against the rules. Just do not believe opponents who tell you something is against the rules: check it, use Ask David or ask a senior EBU tournament director, do not believe other people telling you their version of the rules.

Let me give you an example.
J

KQJ654

Q

QJ432

Pass, pass to you: what do you open? Probably you open 1H. The player who held this hand opened 3H and was accused of cheating by his opponents who said he must have seven hearts to open 3H and he is not allowed 12 points. Were they correct?

Of course not. That is one of the worst 12 point hands I have seen, counting one for a Singleton Jack and two for a Singleton Queen! The hand is clearly not worth 12 points. On the other hand it has nice distribution.  But the main point is that whatever you decide to open is a matter of judgement: you might decide to open 1H, 2H, 3H or even 4H: all of these are legal. Whatever you open other people will open something different and if you are ever accused of opening something illegal always get the director and ask him, or if playing in a “friendly“ game ask me on Ask David later. Of course some agreements are illegal, the most common one being to open a strong 2C or 2D opening on a hand weak in top cards but to do so, while wrong, is not cheating and the director will merely adjust.

[David Stevenson]

The main criteria is the same online or F2F: a report of suspicious activity by a player directly or via a director. However I fancy it is misleading insofar as while there is more cheating online because of the ease of doing it that does not mean there is fifty times as much. One of the side effects of the fact that cheating is easier is that some people are more suspicious and auctions or leads that would never be reported in a club game get reported in an online game. Let me give you an example which has happened to me about three times in forty years.  You hold:

KQxx

AJxx

Kxx

xx

and RHO opens 1C. While double may seem obvious over the years I have had opponents overcall 1H (“I had twelve points so I must bid something”). The bidding then goes 2D, pass, 3D and this player now bids 3S (“I have not shown my spades yet”) and this is a 4-4 fit, makes 140 and I get a very bad score.  To me that is just life and I am sure it has happened to others. But if it happened online some players would report it as suspicious.

I had a lady who bid 2D over my partner’s 1N on 7632 and a 4333 12 count.  That was a 4-4 fit and -90 was a bottom for me. Again, it happens in clubs and opponents who are better players shrug their shoulders and accept it. But online people ignore these bids when they do not work and cry “foul” when they do.
So while there is some cheating going on there is not a lot and you should not let it worry you. Above all, do not be suspicious whenever a poor pair happens to get a good result against you. Worrying about it will spoil the game for you.

[David Stevenson]

Correct. If you hold

KQxx

JTxx

xx

Qxx

and partner opens 1C, pass on your right, you respond 1H. Similarly if partner opens 1C, 1D on my right, I double, leaving room for partner to rebid 1S with 4Ss in either case.

[David Stevenson]

I notice Brian’s suggestion that 1C (1D) X shows 4Ss. I first heard of this when listening to a discussion by Jason Hackett with some other good players. When I talked to John Armstrong (one of England’s greatest players, who sadly died fairly young) he said that you do not tend to lose the spade suit but it is the heart suit that you may find difficult if the next player bids spades. So he and I agreed to play, and I have played with every regular partner since, that 1C (1D) X shows 4Hs, 1C (1D) 1H shows 5+Hs and 1C (1D) 1S shows 4+Ss.
I also play Charles’ method for 1H (1S) X since if you bid a minor you may lose the other one over a spade raise, so double shows both minors.
I am not suggesting anyone follows my approach: as Bernard says this is an area for partner understanding and am merely describing options.

[David Stevenson]

This question is more complex than it looks. If this a regular game on BBO in a club or better it is likely to be played at Level 4 and it is legal to open third in hand with any hand of 8 or more points, so it could be part of their agreements. That means that, in theory, they have misinformed you by not telling you that they do this. However the fact is that a very large proportion of players open light or very light in third hand and practically no-one ever tells opponents. In fact the idea of opening light or very light in third hand is considered general bridge knowledge.

On the other hand the player may have decided to open this once with no agreement to do so. If he opens light in third regularly that would constitute an implicit agreement even if he has never discussed it with his partner.  But if he never opens light, or nearly never, then you might consider this a psyche or a deviation, both of which are legal so long as Partner is not allowing for them.

The effect of all this is that one way or another there is hardly any point worrying about this hand unless you can demonstrate that you were damaged by misinformation and, to be honest, that is pretty unlikely.

None of the above applies if this was in a game restricted to players of limited experience or in a nine high game either of which is run under Level 2. That would mean that this opening is illegal if done by agreement and quite frankly there is not the same presumption that people will open very light third in hand. I would probably expect a director to treat this is as the use of an illegal agreement if playing at Level 2 and cancel the board, giving the perpetrator average minus and his opponents average plus, unless his opponents did better on the board.

[David Stevenson]

In misinformation cases the director will adjust if he believes there was damage after talking to all the players and after looking at the hand and after consulting. So I cannot give a certain answer without the hand and so forth.
The strange thing is that this was on BBO so the player who had the red suits is the one who described the bid as Michaels. So I would try to find out exactly what happened and why.  Did they just explain it as the single word Michaels? If so perhaps the player misunderstood what Michaels means and there clearly is misinformation so I would likely adjust and explain to the player. For many years now the EBU has strongly recommended people not to use names but to describe their agreements carefully and accurately. Perhaps this is one such case where the player concerned misunderstood what Michaels is.
It seems likely that there was misinformation but without seeing the hand I cannot say exactly how I would adjust. Possibly to 4S making your way, quite possibly to a weighted score among several possibilities.

[David Stevenson]

This is the danger with using names and why it is recommended not to do so unless it is a very well known and generally understood name. Charles’ 3H and 3S bids are Smolen as described: everything else he suggests is certainly one way to play it though I don’t particularly like it myself, but the important thing is that it is not Smolen.

[David Stevenson]

Smolen is an American idea to make sure opener plays the hand after a 1NT opening. The idea is that with 5/4 in the majors responder bids Stayman and raises to game if opener rebids a major. If opener rebids 2D then you jump to 3H or 3S, showing the four card major (not the five card major) and opener will bid game in the 5-3 fit or bid 3NT. I think it is a waste of these bids but you might consider it if you do not have a better use for them.

Ekrens is an opening bid of 2D showing 5/4 in the majors and a weak hand. Some people play it as a 2H opening instead of a 2D opening.

Precision Club is a complete system, the main points are the following openings:

1C Any 16+ hand

1D 11-15, the diamonds may be short

1H/S 11-15, 5+ cards

1NT Natural, people play various ranges between 10-12 and 14-16

2C 11-15, 5+ cards

2D 11-15, 3 suits short in diamonds

[David Stevenson]

East was very lucky having opened 2C to find a South player who would pass. The normal auction would be something like

2C (2D) P (5D) ?

How does East expect to describe his hand now?

1C (1D) P (2H) 3S

Now West can visualise the East hand and contribute sensibly. Perhaps the bidding might continue

(4H) 5C (5D)

Now East might judge the hand right. On the actual sequence with the West hand I would double any contract from 5D upwards since it cannot be making if partner has a real 2C opening.

Actually East-West were lucky that North-South were so timid since 7H is cold!

[David Stevenson]

E/W were vulnerable, N/S not.

[David Stevenson]

You can go to the hand in your History, click on Handviewer link, copy the link, and post the link here followed by your comments. We shall be able to see the hand by clicking on the link, and even see how the play went. However we can see the names of all four players which may not be appropriate. There are other ways but I am not sure what they are.

[Author]

Posts