home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
- Path: sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!netcomsv!netcom.com!rudy
- From: rudy@netcom.com (Rudy)
- Subject: Re: HCP Diatribe
- Message-ID: <1993Jan28.003813.16185@netcom.com>
- Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
- References: <C1439q.5Fw@irvine.com> <1993Jan20.061308.2296@netcom.com> <1993Jan26.183734.29020@midway.uchicago.edu>
- Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 00:38:13 GMT
- Lines: 31
-
- In article <1993Jan26.183734.29020@midway.uchicago.edu> pynq@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
- >In article <1993Jan20.061308.2296@netcom.com> rudy@netcom.com (Rudy) writes:
- >>In article <C1439q.5Fw@irvine.com> adam@irvine.com (Adam Beneschan) writes:
- >>>to bet that there are other ACBL rules that make this clear, so that
- >>>the rule you're quoting can't be interpreted properly out of context.
- >
- >>You're kidding, right?
- >
- >Frayed knot. What he is describing is a system a lot like our current
- >system of speed limits. The posted limit is one thing - the actual
- >limit another. The result: confusion and arbitrary enforcement.
-
- Huh? Did you not read the whole post? Adam said: I'm willing to
- be that there are other ACBL rules that make this clear
- and I said yeah, right, ACBL have clear rules?
-
- >>>Maybe so, if they can find another way to ban fert bids. Assuming
- >>>that this is a worthy goal, the 8-HCP rule, together with an
- >>>understanding that players are allowed to add points for hand
- >>>evaluation, seems to me a reasonable way to accomplish the goal.
- >>
- >>Ferts are already banned as "any bid which is destructive in nature"
- >
- >Yup. Like pre-empts, weak two bids, and weak overcalls.
-
- Are you being dense? Ferts don't carry any constructive meaning.
- Pre-empts, while obstructing opponent's bidding carry some limited
- message about the hand. Some point count (within a given range) and
- some distribution (like longest suit).
-
- Maybe I should have said are *only* destructive in nature.
-