3 ms·
The extent to which this just seems to be openly true is startling. Some games, in response to new strategies that are particularly effective, by embracing them
by cge 3y ago
The extent to which this just seems to be openly true is startling. Some games, in response to new strategies that are particularly effective, by embracing them and setting aside older approaches. Some games respond by rebalancing and changing rules to keep the game working well. Bridge just bans the strategies themselves (eg, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strong_pass https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strong_pass and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highly_unusual_method https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highly_unusual_method ).
- ilc 3y agoStrong Pass there's very good reasons to outlaw. It is simply too destructive a method to yield an interesting game. HUMs also tend to end up being very destructive to the opponents, because they really don't understand the full implications of the bid. And may not have discussed how to bid over it. Heck I've run into this with people playing over a strong club system, and they haven't discussed what 2C means. In the end... many games end up with a few rules to make them interesting. I will not defend the ACBL here, I think the WBC is pretty much on the mark last I watched.