ACBL-Land question re: Class "A" conventions
jonathan23
Canadian Bridge Federation (CBF) Erin Berry memorial Rookie-Master game
(got some funny stories from that).
In preparing for the game, I read on the CBF website that we were
restricted to the "old Class 'A'" conventions, or conventions that are
on the SAYC - but nowhere can I find reference to that. Is it the same
as today's Limited Convention Chart?
Thanks,
--
- Jon Campbell
Ottawa CANADA
Barry Margolin
"jonathan23" <camp...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
You can download the Yellow Card booklet from the ACBL web site:
http://web2.acbl.org/documentlibrary/play/sayc_card.pdf
--
Barry Margolin, bar...@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE don't copy me on replies, I'll read them in the group ***
Mark Brader
> In preparing for the game, I read on the CBF website that we were
> restricted to the "old Class 'A'" conventions, or conventions that are
> on the SAYC - but nowhere can I find reference to that. Is it the same
> as today's Limited Convention Chart?
Good gawd! "Old" is the word. It must be something like 20 years
since the ACBL introduced the Limited, General, Mid-, and Super-
convention charts to replace the old classes A, B, C, D, and E.
Class A was analogous to the Limited Convention Chart, in that it
included the conventions that had to be allowed in all games including
novice games, but it wasn't the same. Conventions were identified
by name in those days, not by description. I have an old copy of
the Official Encyclopedia of Bridge, 2nd edition, which gives the
Class A conventions as they existed in 1971 (soon after the five
classes were introduced, replacing a still older system with only
two classes of conventions, I and II):
Slam conventions
Blackwood [the plain kind]
Gerber
Grand Slam Force
Response to NT opening
Stayman [the plain, non-game-forcing kind]
Competitive
All defenses to opponents' conventions
Takeout double
Unusual NT
SOS redouble
Direct cue-bid for strong takeout
Lightner double
General
2C strong artificial forcing [opening] and 2D negative response
It's possible that the list was varied over the following 20 years or
so before the present convention charts replaced the lettered classes,
but I doubt that it varied much. So combine this list with any
conventions you find on the Yellow Card and that should be about right.
--
Mark Brader "TeX has found at least one bug in every Pascal
Toronto compiler it's been run on, I think, and at least
m...@vex.net two in every C compiler." -- Knuth
My text in this article is in the public domain.
jonathan23
Thanks for the history lesson. The CBF says they want as few
conventions as possible in the Rookie-Master games. They mentioned
"Green Card" and that the SAYC convention set would be the absolute
_maximum_ (they preferred much less). My partner was upset about that
because our card has a bunch of conventions that she insists are
necessary (Bergen Raises, Reverse Drury, Montreal Relay, UDCA, etc.).
She wants me to go from Standard American style to 2/1 but I've been
holding out. Personally I like natural bidding and I would do more of
it if I could.
Adam Beneschan
> Jon Campbell:
>
> > In preparing for the game, I read on the CBF website that we were
> > restricted to the "old Class 'A'" conventions, or conventions that are
> > on the SAYC - but nowhere can I find reference to that. Is it the same
> > as today's Limited Convention Chart?
>
> Good gawd! "Old" is the word. It must be something like 20 years
> since the ACBL introduced the Limited, General, Mid-, and Super-
> convention charts to replace the old classes A, B, C, D, and E.
1992, I believe. Maybe 1991.
> Class A was analogous to the Limited Convention Chart, in that it
> included the conventions that had to be allowed in all games including
> novice games, but it wasn't the same. Conventions were identified
> by name in those days, not by description. I have an old copy of
> the Official Encyclopedia of Bridge, 2nd edition, which gives the
> Class A conventions as they existed in 1971 (soon after the five
> classes were introduced, replacing a still older system with only
> two classes of conventions, I and II):
>
> Slam conventions
> Blackwood [the plain kind]
> Gerber
> Grand Slam Force
>
> Response to NT opening
> Stayman [the plain, non-game-forcing kind]
>
> Competitive
> All defenses to opponents' conventions
> Takeout double
> Unusual NT
> SOS redouble
> Direct cue-bid for strong takeout
> Lightner double
>
> General
> 2C strong artificial forcing [opening] and 2D negative response
I think I have the 4th edition at home, so I can check, but I don't
believe this list changed.
In my area, the only events I recall being limited to Class A
conventions were novice events. The list served another purpose,
however, in that the Class A conventions were the conventions that
were not alertable, and all other conventions were (the only exception
being a 2NT conventional response to a weak 2, which was Class C but
was not alertable).
-- Adam
jonathan23
<Lots of good information snipped>
>
> In my area, the only events I recall being limited to Class A
> conventions were novice events. The list served another purpose,
> however, in that the Class A conventions were the conventions that
> were not alertable, and all other conventions were (the only exception
> being a 2NT conventional response to a weak 2, which was Class C but
> was not alertable).
<snip>
Thanks for the additional info, Adam.
I would guess that the motivation is similar for the Erin Berry
Memorial game as a "rookie-master" event - each pair comprises a
rookie (by CBF definition a player with less than 50 points/equivalent
experience) and a Master (in this case, someone who is not a rookie).
My partner has her LM but some of the masters didn't (there were also
a couple of top Canadian players at the Rideau BC where we played).
We enjoyed the game enough, although we didn't place (we were mid-
pack). We did have a couple of wonderful (and many not-so-wondeful)
accidental results and maybe I'll post one or two so that rgb'ers can
(a) have a good laugh, and (b) give me their takes on how we *should*
have gone about it.
The CBF holds Canada-wide rookie-master games twice a year in the fall
and the spring, with the table fees going to a good cause. A less
positive sign for the health of bridge in general is that out of the
approx. 30 pairs who came out for the game at the Rideau BC in Ottawa
only a handful of the players were under middle age and only one or
two were younger than me (33). Most of the rookies seemed to be
people who were taking up bridge (or perhaps taking it up again) in
retirement. Still, I doubt anyone here will be surprised.
Derek Broughton
> In article <hctfq9$arf$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> "jonathan23" <camp...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>
>> I'm a new player in Canada. Recently my partner and I played in the
>> Canadian Bridge Federation (CBF) Erin Berry memorial Rookie-Master game
>> (got some funny stories from that).
>>
>> In preparing for the game, I read on the CBF website that we were
>> restricted to the "old Class 'A'" conventions, or conventions that are
>> on the SAYC - but nowhere can I find reference to that. Is it the same
>> as today's Limited Convention Chart?
>
> You can download the Yellow Card booklet from the ACBL web site:
>
> http://web2.acbl.org/documentlibrary/play/sayc_card.pdf
>
I think the question was actually "what constitutes a Class A convention",
as the Erin Berry conditions imply that they aren't the same thing as SAYC.
otoh, David's blakjak site implies that they are (the difference being
merely a comma, however). otth, David's page _is_ satirical:
http://www.blakjak.demon.co.uk/weasel.htm
It seems essentially to be suggesting the same restriction as if partners in
a tournament have no convention card:
http://web2.acbl.org/codification/CHAPTER+12+-+Section+c.pdf
Baron Barclay sells an "SS2 Convention Card" which it says is "Class A", but
the image on their site isn't readable at any size.
http://bridge.wikia.com/wiki/Alertable says that "Class A" conventions are
those which don't require an alert - which definitely is not the same as
SAYC, which includes at least Jacoby 2N (which is alertable). It's not
entirely correct, though, in its list of non-alertable conventions.
I really should have made an issue of it when the pair sat down at my table
and made a hash of Cappilletti. Then again, they made a hash of
Cappilletti.
--
derek
Adam Beneschan
> http://bridge.wikia.com/wiki/Alertablesays that "Class A" conventions are
> those which don't require an alert - which definitely is not the same as
> SAYC, which includes at least Jacoby 2N (which is alertable). It's not
> entirely correct, though, in its list of non-alertable conventions.
That's because the alerting rules have changed, more than once, since
the time the old convention classification went out of use. The list
of Class A conventions is a list of conventions which didn't require
an alert at that time (with the one exception I already noted). The
information on this web page is obsolete; someone must have entered it
from an out-of-date source, which I suspect was already out of date by
the time it was entered.
-- Adam
Stu G
I am surprised that the CBF is allowed to do this. The CBF is a
subordinate organization of the ACBL. The ACBL Convention charts are
prefaced by this note at the top of the GCC: "The conventions listed
below must be allowed in all ACBL sanctioned tournament play (other
than in events with an
upper restriction of 20 or fewer masterpoints and events for which the
ACBL conditions of contest state otherwise)".
Your description of the players in this event made it clear they could
have more than 20 MPs. So the CBF must have gotten special
dispensation from the ACBL to satisfy the last clause quoted above.
Probably the exception was granted because of the nature of the
event. However, I could not find anything in the ACBL CoCs that
would allow such an event, nor a section that discusses specific
exceptions to the ACBL CoCs.
The main thing was ... you had fun playing in it.
-Stu Goodgold
San Jose, CA
Derek Broughton
> We enjoyed the game enough, although we didn't place (we were mid-
> pack).
Luxury :-) I think my Rookie and I were about third-last in our club, and I
can't lay the blame at her feet (some of it, of course - they're rookies,
and they mostly haven't ever played with these partners before - but I
certainly didn't help).
> The CBF holds Canada-wide rookie-master games twice a year in the fall
> and the spring, with the table fees going to a good cause. A less
> positive sign for the health of bridge in general is that out of the
> approx. 30 pairs who came out for the game at the Rideau BC in Ottawa
> only a handful of the players were under middle age and only one or
> two were younger than me (33). Most of the rookies seemed to be
> people who were taking up bridge (or perhaps taking it up again) in
> retirement. Still, I doubt anyone here will be surprised.
Sad, since, iirc, Erin Berry was from Ottawa.
We had 18 tables, and a good mix of ages (though I don't think anyone would
have been under 33 - our youngest players - I know 4 under 20 - are all far
too advanced to be rookies).
--
derek
Derek Broughton
> I am surprised that the CBF is allowed to do this. The CBF is a
> subordinate organization of the ACBL. The ACBL Convention charts are
> prefaced by this note at the top of the GCC: "The conventions listed
> below must be allowed in all ACBL sanctioned tournament play (other
> than in events with an
> upper restriction of 20 or fewer masterpoints and events for which the
> ACBL conditions of contest state otherwise)".
Which part of "ACBL conditions of contest" is violated here?
It _is_ the condition of contest. Frankly, if the ACBL feels it has any
reason to object, it must be time we parted ways with them.
--
derek
Derek Broughton
> Thanks for the history lesson. The CBF says they want as few
> conventions as possible in the Rookie-Master games. They mentioned
> "Green Card" and that the SAYC convention set would be the absolute
> _maximum_ (they preferred much less). My partner was upset about that
> because our card has a bunch of conventions that she insists are
> necessary (Bergen Raises, Reverse Drury, Montreal Relay, UDCA, etc.).
Your partner needs her head examined. I watch so many LMs get into trouble
with their Bergen raises, and most of them haven't even heard of Montreal
Relay.
--
derek
Mark Brader
> I am surprised that the CBF is allowed to do this. The CBF is a
> subordinate organization of the ACBL. The ACBL Convention charts are
> prefaced by this note at the top of the GCC: "The conventions listed
> below must be allowed in all ACBL sanctioned tournament play (other
> than in events with an upper restriction of 20 or fewer masterpoints
> and events for which the ACBL conditions of contest state otherwise)".
Maybe the event did not qualify as an "ACBL sanctioned tournament"?
--
Mark Brader, Toronto | "Ah. I am now confused at a much more
m...@vex.net | advanced level, thank you." --Mike Lyle
Barry Margolin
Derek Broughton <de...@pointerstop.ca> wrote:
I think you've got it backwards. The way I read that is that a
sanctioned event must allow all the conventions on the GCC unless the
ACBL has given special dispensation. Clubs are allowed quite a bit of
latitude in their conditions of contest, but limiting conventions to
less than the GCC is not included.
jonathan23
> On Nov 5, 10:07�am, jonathan23 <campb...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
> > On Nov 5, 12:04�pm, Adam Beneschan <a...@irvine.com> wrote:
> >
> > <Lots of good information snipped>
> >
> >
> >
> > > In my area, the only events I recall being limited to Class A
> > > conventions were novice events. �The list served another purpose,
> > > however, in that the Class A conventions were the conventions that
> > > were not alertable, and all other conventions were (the only
> > > exception being a 2NT conventional response to a weak 2, which
> > > was Class C but was not alertable).
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> > Thanks for the additional info, Adam.
> >
> > I would guess that the motivation is similar for the Erin Berry
> > Memorial game as a "rookie-master" event - each pair comprises a
> > rookie (by CBF definition a player with less than 50
> > points/equivalent experience) and a Master (in this case, someone
> > who is not a rookie). My partner has her LM but some of the
> > masters didn't (there were also a couple of top Canadian players at
> > the Rideau BC where we played).
> >
> > We enjoyed the game enough, although we didn't place (we were mid-
> > pack). We did have a couple of wonderful (and many not-so-wondeful)
> > accidental results and maybe I'll post one or two so that rgb'ers
> > can (a) have a good laugh, and (b) give me their takes on how we
> > should have gone about it.
I suppose you're right...and coincidentally after you posted this I
went back to the CBF website to see if I could review and, if need be,
copy and paste the relevant paragraph for all here to see.
Unfortunately, it had disappeared. I guess since the game was over the
CBF updated their site (no conspiracy theorist, me).
If I remember to do so, I'll see what they say about the Helen Shields
R-M game in the spring. I doubt that the CBF would do anything illegal
with an ACBL sanctioned game (and it was, there were masterpoints given
out according to the results, just not to us). Maybe I overreacted to
wording that merely strong suggested that people keep to the "green
card" (those words were actually used) and "Class A" conventions (also
mentioned), and nothing more than what is on the SAYC. Maybe I just
wanted to rein in my partner's convention mania for one session (little
good though it does to make an addict stay off the stuff for one day).
--
jonathan23
> Stu Goodgold:
> > I am surprised that the CBF is allowed to do this. The CBF is a
> > subordinate organization of the ACBL. The ACBL Convention charts
> > are prefaced by this note at the top of the GCC: "The conventions
> > listed below must be allowed in all ACBL sanctioned tournament play
> > (other than in events with an upper restriction of 20 or fewer
> > masterpoints and events for which the ACBL conditions of contest
> > state otherwise)".
>
> Maybe the event did not qualify as an "ACBL sanctioned tournament"?
Well, there were masterpoints, so it's not under the rader entirely. Is
there a loophole that it could just be a widely-duplicated club game? I
think the MPs were only given out on a club-performance basis (there
weren't many, either, since there was only one flight). If you do well
nationally, you get a nice shiny plaque with your name on it.
--
David Stevenson
>Barry Margolin wrote:
>
>> In article <hctfq9$arf$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
>> "jonathan23" <camp...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>>
>>> I'm a new player in Canada. Recently my partner and I played in the
>>> Canadian Bridge Federation (CBF) Erin Berry memorial Rookie-Master game
>>> (got some funny stories from that).
>>>
>>> In preparing for the game, I read on the CBF website that we were
>>> restricted to the "old Class 'A'" conventions, or conventions that are
>>> on the SAYC - but nowhere can I find reference to that. Is it the same
>>> as today's Limited Convention Chart?
>>
>> You can download the Yellow Card booklet from the ACBL web site:
>>
>> http://web2.acbl.org/documentlibrary/play/sayc_card.pdf
>>
>I think the question was actually "what constitutes a Class A convention",
>as the Erin Berry conditions imply that they aren't the same thing as SAYC.
>otoh, David's blakjak site implies that they are (the difference being
>merely a comma, however). otth, David's page _is_ satirical:
>http://www.blakjak.demon.co.uk/weasel.htm
Not only satirical, but moved: that URL will not survive, and that
site is never updated now. The correct URL is
--
David Stevenson Bridge RTFLB Cats Railways
Liverpool, England, UK Fax: +44 870 055 7697 ICQ: 20039682
<webj...@googlemail.com> bluejak on OKB
Bridgepage: http://blakjak.org/brg_menu.htm
Derek Broughton
> In article <807cs6-...@morgen.pointerstop.ca>,
> Derek Broughton <de...@pointerstop.ca> wrote:
>
>> Stu G wrote:
>>
>> > I am surprised that the CBF is allowed to do this. The CBF is a
>> > subordinate organization of the ACBL. The ACBL Convention charts are
>> > prefaced by this note at the top of the GCC: "The conventions listed
>> > below must be allowed in all ACBL sanctioned tournament play (other
>> > than in events with an
>> > upper restriction of 20 or fewer masterpoints and events for which the
>> > ACBL conditions of contest state otherwise)".
>>
>> Which part of "ACBL conditions of contest" is violated here?
>>
>> It _is_ the condition of contest. Frankly, if the ACBL feels it has any
>> reason to object, it must be time we parted ways with them.
>
> I think you've got it backwards. The way I read that is that a
> sanctioned event must allow all the conventions on the GCC unless the
> ACBL has given special dispensation.
I don't have it backwards, I agree that's what it says. However...
> Clubs are allowed quite a bit of
> latitude in their conditions of contest, but limiting conventions to
> less than the GCC is not included.
The CBF Rookie-master games are specifically intended to draw in those
players who will not normally play Duplicate. One of the "conditions of
contest", as set by the CBF, has always been that conventions are limited,
so as to not cause too much confusion for the rookies. If the ACBL has a
problem with that (and I really don't believe they do), then it would imo be
time to extricate ourselves from the ACBL.
--
derek
Derek Broughton
> Stu Goodgold:
>> I am surprised that the CBF is allowed to do this. The CBF is a
>> subordinate organization of the ACBL. The ACBL Convention charts are
>> prefaced by this note at the top of the GCC: "The conventions listed
>> below must be allowed in all ACBL sanctioned tournament play (other
>> than in events with an upper restriction of 20 or fewer masterpoints
>> and events for which the ACBL conditions of contest state otherwise)".
>
> Maybe the event did not qualify as an "ACBL sanctioned tournament"?
It offers ACBL masterpoints...
--
derek
jonathan23
> jonathan23 wrote:
>
>
> > Thanks for the history lesson. The CBF says they want as few
> > conventions as possible in the Rookie-Master games. They mentioned
> > "Green Card" and that the SAYC convention set would be the absolute
> > maximum (they preferred much less). My partner was upset about that
> > because our card has a bunch of conventions that she insists are
> > necessary (Bergen Raises, Reverse Drury, Montreal Relay, UDCA,
> > etc.).
>
> Your partner needs her head examined. I watch so many LMs get into
> trouble with their Bergen raises, and most of them haven't even heard
> of Montreal Relay.
I won't tell her that...but I think I've got better results bidding
straight natural too and last night we had hands in two subsequent
rounds where she started the auction with a Montreal Relay "could be as
short as 1" 1C bid and I had a mittful of clubs. Strangely enough we
had the _exact_ same auction twice, and the second time our opponents
were very bemused by our inability to keep a straight face as we made
the exact same bids we had at the next table about 15 minutes before.
Something like:
1C -- 2C
2NT - 3NT
The first time it went down 3. That was entirely my fault for raising,
I misunderstood 2NT _just_ long enough to think we weren't in a bad
spot and put the 3NT card down. The second time it made +1 or +2. I
had a hand that actually _should_ have raised that time, but Barbara
didn't know it until my cards hit the table).
Stu G
>
> - Show quoted text -
I personally think this event is a worthwhile endeavor. Even so, the
CBF should not be equated to a small club owner. I doubt they are
violating ACBL policies, intentionally or otherwise, especially since
it sounds as though this event is a long-standing one - why else would
they mention "A" conventions. There must be some exemption or
grandfather clause that permits this event to take place as a
sanctioned tournament; I just couldn't find it.
One other possible explanation is that this event is not a
'tournament'. The ACBL CoCs quoted above apply only to tournaments,
not to club games (the preface says sanctioned tournaments, not
sanctioned games). Is it run on a club by club basis, or does the CBF
make it a tournament like a STAC?
Maybe your District rep to the ACBL Board of Directors can shed some
light on this matter. Or, if you are in District 2 (Ontario), maybe
his precedessor, Jonathan Steinberg, would know.
jonathan23
> On Nov 6, 6:04�am, Derek Broughton <de...@pointerstop.ca> wrote:
> > Barry Margolin wrote:
> > > In article <807cs6-k29....@morgen.pointerstop.ca>,
> > > �Derek Broughton <de...@pointerstop.ca> wrote:
> >
> > >> Stu G wrote:
> >
> > >> > I am surprised that the CBF is allowed to do this. �The CBF is
> > a >> > subordinate organization of the ACBL. �The ACBL Convention
> > charts are >> > prefaced by this note at the top of the GCC: "The
> > conventions listed >> > below must be allowed in all ACBL
> > sanctioned tournament play (other >> > than in events with an
> > >> > upper restriction of 20 or fewer masterpoints and events for
> > which the >> > ACBL conditions of contest state otherwise)".
> >
> > >> Which part of "ACBL conditions of contest" is violated here?
> >
> > >> It is the condition of contest. �Frankly, if the �ACBL feels it
I believe that is right, Stu...It's not a tournament, it's a FUNdraiser
for the Erin Berry Memorial Fund, which helps junior bridge players
attend tournaments such as the Youth NABCs. The game is run by clubs on
a voluntary basis. They just happen to be using predealt hands that
are also being used in other clubs across Canada on the same evening.
You only get points based on how you did in your club (We didn't come
close). If you happen to top the nation you get your name in the
results and a plaque, but no greater masterpoint award.
PS Not all of Ontario is in District 2.
--
- Jon Campbell
Ottawa CANADA (District 1)
Jonathan Campbell
<snip>
> otoh, David's blakjak site implies that they are
> (the difference being merely a comma, however). otth, David's page _is_
> satirical: http://www.blakjak.demon.co.uk/weasel.htm
>
That is _hilarious_!!!!!!
--
- Jon Campbell, Ottawa CANADA
Derek Broughton
> Stu G wrote:
>
>> One other possible explanation is that this event is not a
>> 'tournament'. The ACBL CoCs quoted above apply only to tournaments,
>> not to club games (the preface says sanctioned tournaments, not
>> sanctioned games). Is it run on a club by club basis, or does the CBF
>> make it a tournament like a STAC?
>>
>> Maybe your District rep to the ACBL Board of Directors can shed some
>> light on this matter. Or, if you are in District 2 (Ontario), maybe
>> his precedessor, Jonathan Steinberg, would know.
>
> I believe that is right, Stu...It's not a tournament, it's a FUNdraiser
> for the Erin Berry Memorial Fund, which helps junior bridge players
> attend tournaments such as the Youth NABCs. The game is run by clubs on
> a voluntary basis. They just happen to be using predealt hands that
> are also being used in other clubs across Canada on the same evening.
> You only get points based on how you did in your club (We didn't come
> close). If you happen to top the nation you get your name in the
> results and a plaque, but no greater masterpoint award.
>
> PS Not all of Ontario is in District 2.
I'm pretty sure that's all true. And yes, Jonathan and I are both in
District 1 (I'm on the East coast). Speaking of which, Jonathan, did you
know Jacques LaFrance (TD)? I think he was in Montreal, but not sure. We
would only encounter him occasionally at Regionals and when our regular TD
was unavailable for a sectional. He died suddenly recently, and we'll miss
him.
--
derek
jonathan23
<Snip>
>
> I'm pretty sure that's all true. And yes, Jonathan and I are both in
> District 1 (I'm on the East coast). Speaking of which, Jonathan, did you
> know Jacques LaFrance (TD)? I think he was in Montreal, but not sure. We
> would only encounter him occasionally at Regionals and when our regular TD
> was unavailable for a sectional. He died suddenly recently, and we'll miss
> him.
> --
> derek-
I can't say I ever heard of M. LaFrance, but I am still quite new on
the scene here. I'm sure I know people who did know him.
- JC
Michael Angelo Ravera
As I discovered in work that I was doing for my own unit, Unit games
and above MUST be conducted based upon the ACBL Convention Charts. You
can allow mid-chart or superchart for some events with proper
advertising, but don't even MENTION the WBF sticker scheme.
If it were up to me, I'd allow only Green and Blue Sticker conventions
in some beginner events and ban only Yellow Sticker and Brown Sticker
(permitting Red) conventions in all others (except in trials for
events permitting Brown Sticker and Yellow Sticker methods).