[blml] Nondisclosure

[Nigel]

[Konrad Ciborski]
I do (really think the defense should be the same if 1S meant "majors or 
diamonds", "majors or minors" (CRaSh)
or "spades or reds). For many years I had one generic defense to _all_ 
artificial systems and we've never had any problems with it. You really 
don't need to fine-tune your defense every single time - the payoff is 
far too small. Trust me.

Right now I'm playing a strong club system and I have one
generic defense for all cases when a 1S overcall doesn't promise
a specific suit. I really don't anything more detailed.

BTW I used to play a strong pass system for 7 years when these
systems were allowed in all tournaments in Poland. Poland was an
oasis of freedom at that time and generally people knew how do
defend against weird systems because people knew them from experience.
Then came the system regulations and they absolutely killed all
artificial systems in Poland. Polish juniors don't even know
the opening bids of "No Name", the most popular Polish strong pass system.
These systems disappeared because you can no longer practice them in regular
tournaments and no one is going make something their basic system
if they can only play it a few times a year in league matches.

So three years ago during a playoff match (72 deals) to qualify
for the Polish First Division when we were down by 50 at the half I
sat down to play with my old partner with whom I used to play for 7 seven
years and we decided to play strong pass. Naturally we had sent the detailed
system description well in advance and all just to be able to switch
to strong pass in case the situation became desperate. So our
opponents knew we might play it days in advance.

We sat down against the junior world champions Kalita - Kotorowicz
who are already one of the best Polish pairs. And we beat them nicely
during the 36 deals left to play. The problem was that, say, 20 years
ago they would be familiar with such systems because they would have
to play against them in regular tournaments. Today a top junior
pair has never seen anything nonstandard in their whole lives.
So us playing a strong pass systems was like putting a tiger on a island
where there has never been any tigers and other animals have no clue
how to defend against it.

This is exactly the same effect of Larry Cohen complaining
about having to play against the Polish Club - it is a vicious circle.
If you disallow something on the basis that people don't know
how to defend against it then how on earth are they going to learn
to defend against it when you ban it in the first place?

That's why the sentence in the WBF Systems Policy about "affording
proper consideration to progress and innovation" is one of the biggest
jokes - the WBF Systems Policy killed all innovations in bridge in
recent times. How many new systems have appeared in world bridge
in recent years? In Poland since the WBF Systems Policy has been
adopted the number of pairs playing anything different from the
Polish Club or short club systems is below 0.01%.

So getting back to the problem at hand - Wayne, if your opponents had
a properely filled CC and you failed to look at it then I firmly
believe it was your fault, Wayne, and you deserved to be at a disadvantage.
I also firmly believe that every pair at such a high level should have
a bunch of generic defenses to all kinds of weirdness. If I could
do it when I played in the Fourth Division then someone who has
aspirations to represent his country at the national level should
be able to do it, too. It is really not that hard.

[nige1]

Konrad's arguments are usually completely clear and persuasive but here, 
exceptionally, a couple of points would benefit from Konrad's further 
elucidation:

[A] I am intrigued by generic defences to such artificial overcalls. 
Please would you explain yours Konrad?

[B] Wayne's opponents did *not* have their 1S overcall on their 
convention card and, anyway, the conditions of contest *mandated* timely 
pre-disclosure of systems.

Hence Wayne seems to have had a legal right to object. In justice, he 
would expect the director to prevent opponents from using the convention.

IMO, Wayne also had a moral right to object. Banning of the convention 
would have been a fair ruling because it put Wayne at an unnecessary 
disadvantage.

Wayne's opponents and their team-captain adopted a cavalier attitude to 
the rules of contest. They had clear warning, ample time, and several 
opportunities to divulge their unusual methods.

Why should they be allowed to get away with this? what kind of precedent 
does it create?