You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
CONCLUSION
Thanks everyone for your valuable contributions. This poll has yielded no consensus as to what ‘convention’ means or should mean. The term is no longer used (‘deprecated’) in the Laws and official regulations. Yet it is widely used in less than official settings. Apart from tradition, this could be because there is no single word for ‘artificial call’ nor for ‘partnership understanding’. Also, some languages have no common word for ‘treatment’.
Only a minority (24%) thinks ‘convention’ is just another term for ‘artificial call’. There is broad support (58%), but short of consensus, for the idea that a ‘convention’ is any agreement, artificial or natural, possibly synonymous with ‘partnership understanding’. Clearly a ‘convention’ may well be a defensive carding agreement, such as a signal. Some think a ‘convention’ can be a set of agreements rather than a single agreement.
With no consensus reached, I for me shall henceforth: * avoid using the term ‘convention’ in official regulations or speaking thereof * otherwise use ‘convention’ in the sense of explicit partnership understanding.
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
2♣ then 3♣: showing a game force with long clubs and a second suit. 2♣ then 3♦ would be a game-forcing one-suiter in clubs (!). Game forces with diamonds as the long suit are included in our Multi 2♦, with the same rebids: 2♦ then 3♣ is long diamonds and a second suit, 2♦ then 3♦ the one-suiter.
As for bidding this hand as balanced, we could easily be down in 3NT (after a spade lead and missing the ♣A) while 6♣ is cold.
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Depends strongly on the meaning of 1♦. If that is always or usually a five-card suit, 3♦ now as ‘natural’ does not make sense. If on the other hand 1♦ is ‘semi-natural’ and as of two or three diamonds, then 3♦ as natural stands out. (Please supply methods!)
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Matter or not, deprecated (Ed) or not, the term ‘convention’ is widely used in bridge outside official Laws and regulations (at least where I live). Therefore it makes sense to agree on what we mean by it.
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I appreciate that. I am, however, primarily looking for a consensus meaning of ‘convention’ that does not conflict with the definition and use of ‘artificial’ in the Laws.
By the way, ‘natural’ does not occur in the Laws either.
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My € 0,02: I believe that when you’re behind, or enduring a ‘heat #3’, the best strategy is to play the best you can and aggressively but fairly normally. Doing something outright silly, like opening this hand, may occasionally work but is usually the surest way to lose.
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
2♦: Multi including a game force in diamonds. Over 2♥, which tends to show (not guarantee) some spades, I will follow up with 3NT, showing about this hand. Over 2♠ I will rebid 3♦, showing a one-suiter.
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes, at imps – not at matchpoints – I would have responded 2♣ with this excellent suit. I presume 7♣ for my vote can stand for this (it is not to be tacky).
Rosalind Hengeveld
Rosalind Hengeveld
Rosalind Hengeveld
Rosalind Hengeveld
Rosalind Hengeveld
Thanks everyone for your valuable contributions. This poll has yielded no consensus as to what ‘convention’ means or should mean. The term is no longer used (‘deprecated’) in the Laws and official regulations. Yet it is widely used in less than official settings. Apart from tradition, this could be because there is no single word for ‘artificial call’ nor for ‘partnership understanding’. Also, some languages have no common word for ‘treatment’.
Only a minority (24%) thinks ‘convention’ is just another term for ‘artificial call’. There is broad support (58%), but short of consensus, for the idea that a ‘convention’ is any agreement, artificial or natural, possibly synonymous with ‘partnership understanding’. Clearly a ‘convention’ may well be a defensive carding agreement, such as a signal. Some think a ‘convention’ can be a set of agreements rather than a single agreement.
With no consensus reached, I for me shall henceforth:
* avoid using the term ‘convention’ in official regulations or speaking thereof
* otherwise use ‘convention’ in the sense of explicit partnership understanding.
Feel free to follow suit.
Rosalind Hengeveld
As for bidding this hand as balanced, we could easily be down in 3NT (after a spade lead and missing the ♣A) while 6♣ is cold.
Rosalind Hengeveld
Rosalind Hengeveld
Rosalind Hengeveld
Rosalind Hengeveld
Rosalind Hengeveld
Rosalind Hengeveld
Rosalind Hengeveld
By the way, ‘natural’ does not occur in the Laws either.
Rosalind Hengeveld
Rosalind Hengeveld
2NT as Scrambling (two or three places to play) would not be very useful, as double already shows more than one place to play.
Rosalind Hengeveld
Rosalind Hengeveld
Rosalind Hengeveld
Rosalind Hengeveld
Rosalind Hengeveld