[blml] natural bids and conventional bids

[richard willey]

On 1/4/07, Ed Reppert <ereppert at rochester.rr.com> wrote:
> "Natural and Conventional are mutually exclusive." So said a poster
> on bridge base online.

I was actually quoting the position of the ACBL.

There was a discussion whether a Muiderberg style 2M opening that
showed 5+ SSpades and a 4+ card minor was legal at the GCC level.  I
claimed that the opening is

(a) Conventional
(b) Not legal at the GCC level

AWM contacted the ACBL and received the following response from Mike
Flader.  (Personally, I think that this interpretation is wrong)


>Dear Adam,
>
>Regarding the passage that states that methods no specifically
allowed are disallowed,
>the GCC applies to the use of conventional calls, which, by
definition, are not an offer to
>play in the denomination named. Thus, a natural opening even though
not specifically
>mentioned is allowed.

>A natural weak two bid which guaranteed a side four card minor would
be allowed
>since it is natural. What is disallowed is a convention like a 2S
opening which shows
>two undefined suits. If 2S showed both minors and at least 10 HCP, it
would be allowed.
>
>Hope this answers your questions.
>
>Mike Flader





-- 
"We only wish to represent things as they are, and to expose the error
of believing that a mere bravo without intellect can make one
distinguished in war"

Clausewitz