[wclass___]

I have never understood the definitions of HUM.

Quote

A Pass in the opening position shows at least the values generally accepted for an opening bid of one, even if there are alternative weak possibilities

First, what are "values generally accepted for an opening bid of one"?

Second, does "alternative weak possibilities" relate to Pass being multi way bid? If so, suppose Pass is either 0-11 or 12-14. If we take 12-14 as "values generally accepted for an opening bid of one" and 0-11 as "even if there are alternative weak possibilities" this seems to classify as HUM. Right?

Quote

By partnership agreement an opening bid at the one level may be weaker than pass.

What does "weaker" mean? In a similar thread from 2006, a poster said that

Quote

It is called judgement. Nowhere does it say that you have to user A=4,K=3, etc. You can evaluate your hand using
whatever method you like.

However, I don't see this stated explicitly anywhere nor there seem to be anything what would imply it. Even so, if you can use any system you want, you can design evaluation scheme that intentionally subverts the purpose of the rule.

Quote

By partnership agreement an opening bid at the one level may be made with values a king or more below average strength.

Is this the same as saying "[...] an opening bid at the one level has to promise at least 8hcp"?

Quote

By partnership agreement an opening bid at the one level shows either length or shortage in a specified suit

Quote

Length three cards or more
Shortage two cards or less

This rule seems ridiculous, because according to the definition of length and shortage a suit is always either short or long. Take 1♠ as promising 5+♠, now your ♥'s are always either long or short and hence HUM.

Quote

EXCEPTION: one of a minor in a strong club or strong diamond system

Quote

Strong high card strength a king or more greater than that of an average hand

This seem to imply that 1♣ = 13+ with either 5♥+ or 5♠+ is explicitly not HUM. Right?


In my examples the bid implies rather than shows, but I see no reason to make a distinction.

Thank you!

[mycroft]

Congratulations, you are trying to use formal logic to break definitions which were designed to be "we know what we mean and you do too". It's a great game, and it's been done a lot in the last 50 years. But because the WBF *does* know what it means, and so do the people who want to play HUMs (and so do the people who play against Roth-Stone or other non-HUMs that could get caught in the wash), they haven't bothered to fix it, and probably won't. Lazy? You got it. Do I like this situation? Well, see my self-described nick...

If they put in the term "non-touching" in various places, it would get the points across without too much problem.

So, yes, they consider Forcing Pass (where an opening "pass" is, or is often, Strong) to be a HUM. They aren't going to change that just because it's "0-5 or 13+" (or even "0-1 or 13+"). They don't consider Roth-Stone, or Kaplan-Sheinwold (both of which pass a bunch of 12s or 13s even) to be a HUM, however, even if they technically fit this description (or the next one).

The ACBL is thinking about moving in this direction for a definition and have qualified that statement to mean "if there is an exact hand (same shape) that by agreement is a Pass, but with an honour card replaced by a small card, would be opened at the one level, you're playing a HUM." (or the ACBL equivalent).

Same with the fert section - "if a hand opens with a call at the one level, but if without changing shape one or more small cards were replaced by honours, would be passed, you're playing a HUM."

"a king or more below average" - no, despite the ACBL and others, that does not mean "less than 8 high". ♠KJTxxx ♥KT9xxx ♦- ♣x is *not* "a king or more below average", and if you open that one (or the less shapely 7's-that-are-9's) by agreement, you're not in HUM territory. But if you must open a flat 7, or an average-ish 7, by agreement, at the one level; there you go.

"long or short" - again, add the "non-touching" into the ranges. Regres (IIRC) played that 1M was "either 0-2 or 5+ M", and that's considered HUM. Similarly, a system where 1♠ promises 4+spades and either 0-1 or 5+ hearts would be HUM.

Note the "Precision exception" :-). As you said, you can play 1♣ "Strong, promising a major" (not sure what you're going to do with the rest of the calls, though), but primarily that exception allows 1♦ "11-15, 0+ diamonds" (denies 6cm or 5cM, and out of NT range, basically). It also allows the Power Precision 1♦ "11-15, promises a 4-card major".

If you're trying to end-run a HUM in your local environment that uses WBF rules, you'll probably fail. If you're trying to break the WBF rules for amusement, like any set of regulations, you'll succeed. If you're just trying to Sam Dinkin your way to glory (or if you *are* Sam Dinkin), more power to you, from my end!

[mycroft]

/me thinks: "so, is Cloister Club" (0-40 pass, all seats, all vulnerabilities) a HUM?

[barmar]

mycroft, on 2017-April-12, 12:56, said:

/me thinks: "so, is Cloister Club" (0-40 pass, all seats, all vulnerabilities) a HUM?

I think so. Pass shows at least an opening hand (13+ HCP), but also has weak possibilities (<13 HCP).