Is unusual NT alertable?
Stig Holmquist
The ACBL convention card seems to define the unusual NT as a jump bid
of 2NT over 1 ot a suit. It does not include 2 NT over 1 NT. Nor does
the ACBL Encyclopedia specifically mention 2 NT ove 1 NT as unusual.
The Brozel convention treats 2NT over 1 NT as showing both minors and
thus might be alertable. Does the same rule apply to anybody bidding 2
NT as an overcall of 1 NT to show the two minors? Are both or neither
alertable? Where does ACBL clarify this use of 2 NT?
Stig Holmquist
jonathan23
According to the colour coding on the convention card, 2NT over a suit
bid to show minors or the two lowest unbid suits (Unusual NT) are black
and thus do not require an alert (red) or an announcement (blue).
I don't think Unusual 2NT as most people would define it applies over a
1NT opener because no suit is named. You can use it to show the
minors, this is part of defences to 1NT such as Cappelletti (I never
know if I've spelt that right) which are alertable.
--
- Jon Campbell
Ottawa CANADA
Will in New Haven
In practice, 2NT over an opponent's 1NT is alertable when it means
something _other_ than a takeout for the Minors. If you fail to alert
it when it shows the minors the director will, as actually happened
last year, tell the opponents that this is what the bid _means_ absent
an alert and that they have no recourse.
I would alert it against novices because it can't hurt.
--
Will in New Haven
Stu G
The official ACBL Alert Chart states that: "Jumps to 2NT or any four-
level or higher notrump bid that is unusual" are not alertable. It
doesn't say the 2N bid has to show minors or anything else, although
an argument can be made for having anything other than '2 lower unbid'
fall into the highly unusual category of alertable bids.
What the chart does list as alertable NT overcalls:
a) Jump to 3NT that is unusual
b) Other conventional notrump overcalls
c) Natural jumps to 2NT, except in balancing seat
So by the letter of the chart, (1N) 2N should be alertable by b). Now
I doubt that failing to alert will lead to any adjustment in anything
beyond a novice game.
I suspect that it was not the intent of the C&C committee to make this
2N alertable, but was most likely an oversight is trying to write a
streamlined Alert chart. I'll see if I can bring it to their
attention to correct.
-Stu Goodgold
San Jose, CA
jonathan23
> On Nov 22, 12:46�pm, "jonathan23" <campb...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
> > Stig Holmquist wrote:
> >
> > > The ACBL convention card seems to define the unusual NT as a jump
> > > bid of 2NT over 1 ot a suit. �It does not include 2 NT over 1 NT.
> > > Nor does the ACBL Encyclopedia specifically mention 2 NT ove 1 NT
> > > as unusual.
> >
> > > The Brozel convention treats 2NT over 1 NT as showing �both
> > > minors and thus might be alertable. Does the same rule apply to
> > > anybody bidding 2 NT as an overcall of 1 NT to show the two
> > > minors? Are both or neither alertable? Where does ACBL clarify
> > > this use of 2 NT?
> >
> > > Stig Holmquist
> >
> > According to the colour coding on the convention card, 2NT over a
> > suit bid to show minors or the two lowest unbid suits (Unusual NT)
> > are black and thus do not require an alert (red) or an announcement
> > (blue).
> >
> > I don't think Unusual 2NT as most people would define it applies
> > over a 1NT opener because no suit is named. �You can use it to show
> > the minors, this is part of defences to 1NT such as Cappelletti (I
> > never know if I've spelt that right) which are alertable.
> >
>
> In practice, 2NT over an opponent's 1NT is alertable when it means
> something other than a takeout for the Minors. If you fail to alert
> it when it shows the minors the director will, as actually happened
> last year, tell the opponents that this is what the bid means absent
> an alert and that they have no recourse.
>
> I would alert it against novices because it can't hurt.
>
> --
> Will in New Haven
Thanks for the clarification. I had interpreted the "Notrump
overcalls" box on the CC as being for NT bidding over a suit, and the
"Defence vs notrump" to be separate things, and that the red lines in
the latter meant that anything other than natural bids had to be
alerted.
Will in New Haven
That is a very reasonable interpretation. In fact, if I had no
experience of how directors seem to interpret the matter I would agree
that you are correct. I would alert the bid in question against
seemingly inexperienced opponents. After all, it can't hurt.
jonathan23
> On Nov 22, 3:25锟絧m, "jonathan23" <campb...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
> > Will in New Haven wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Nov 22, 12:46锟絧m, "jonathan23" <campb...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
> > > > Stig Holmquist wrote:
> >
> > > > > The ACBL convention card seems to define the unusual NT as a
> > > > > jump bid of 2NT over 1 ot a suit. 锟絀t does not include 2 NT
> > > > > over 1 NT. Nor does the ACBL Encyclopedia specifically
> > > > > mention 2 NT ove 1 NT as unusual.
> >
> > > > > The Brozel convention treats 2NT over 1 NT as showing 锟絙oth
> > > > > minors and thus might be alertable. Does the same rule apply
> > > > > to anybody bidding 2 NT as an overcall of 1 NT to show the two
> > > > > minors? Are both or neither alertable? Where does ACBL clarify
> > > > > this use of 2 NT?
> >
> > > > > Stig Holmquist
> >
> > > > According to the colour coding on the convention card, 2NT over
> > > > a suit bid to show minors or the two lowest unbid suits
> > > > (Unusual NT) are black and thus do not require an alert (red)
> > > > or an announcement (blue).
> >
> > > > I don't think Unusual 2NT as most people would define it applies
> > > > over a 1NT opener because no suit is named. 锟結ou can use it to
> > > > show the minors, this is part of defences to 1NT such as
> > > > Cappelletti (I never know if I've spelt that right) which are
> > > > alertable.
> >
> > > In practice, 2NT over an opponent's 1NT is alertable when it means
> > > something other than a takeout for the Minors. If you fail to
> > > alert it when it shows the minors the director will, as actually
> > > happened last year, tell the opponents that this is what the bid
> > > means absent an alert and that they have no recourse.
> >
> > > I would alert it against novices because it can't hurt.
> >
> > > --
> > > Will in New Haven
> >
> > Thanks for the clarification. 锟絀 had interpreted the "Notrump
> > overcalls" box on the CC as being for NT bidding over a suit, and
> > the "Defence vs notrump" to be separate things, and that the red
> > lines in the latter meant that anything other than natural bids had
> > to be alerted.
>
> That is a very reasonable interpretation. In fact, if I had no
> experience of how directors seem to interpret the matter I would agree
> that you are correct. I would alert the bid in question against
> seemingly inexperienced opponents. After all, it can't hurt.
>
> --
> Will in New Haven
So, the U2NT bidder's partner pulls the Alert card?
Or can it be announced by the partner?
My usual partner and I are just getting into alerts and announcements
(at least, more announcements than just "15-17" and "transfer") with
our system so I still have some things to learn there.
Fred.
I can't absolutely swear it's the current alert procedure since it I
cant' find a date but I find at http://www.acbl.org/play/alert.html
in PART IX: DEFENSIVE AND COMPETITIVE CALLS states
"Non-jump unusual notrump bids below 4NT, except those made by a
passed hand, must be Alerted".
I assume that this includes both 1NT-(2NT) and 1H-(P)-1S-(1NT), both
of which I'd think should be alerted if they're not unusual no-trump.
Fred.
Will in New Haven
The second one must be alerted if it _is_ an unusual NT. The rules you
quoted indicate that the first one should be alerted but at least some
ACBL directors don't seem to think so.
Fred.
>
> - Show quoted text -
What do you take the normal understanding for 1H-(pass)-1S-(1NT) to be
then?
Fred.
Will in New Haven
If it isn't alerted, it's a balanced hand and some sort of point count
range, usually strong. It is likely that there are some fields where
some sort of takeout for the unbid suits would be more common and I
play it that way myself but there is an expected meaning, absent an
alert. I think that the reason no one alerts, and directors don't
expect you to alert, (1NT) - 2NT is that there isn't any other common
way to play it. It is a very usual Unusual Notrump.
Fred.
Thanks. I guess, it's just difficult for me to conceive of playing
1pear-(pass)-1grape-(1NT) as natural even though I know many do. To
me the natual meaning expresses a deathwish, so the weak takeout must
be intended. I have been alerting it. I just don't believe it makes
sense to require it.
Fred.
jackie...@gmail.com
Alerting a non-alert able bid is improper, and could result in a
ruling against you.
Spudamto
Alan Malloy
I agree with you here, but there are players who feel the same about
1x-(1NT). They'd rather use that as some kind of takeout, and do
something else when they have a strong balanced hand (probably double?
I'm not sure since I don't play this). Whether a certain bid expresses a
death wish or not is a matter of opinion, especially in these uncertain
times, when opener might have a shapely 10-count, and responder a
misfitting 4-count. Proponents of the natural sandwich 1NT will say that
bidding at the one level when they might have the values for game is not
suicidal.
--
Cheers,
Alan (San Jose, California, USA)
Stig Holmquist
In the last edition of "Goren's New Bridge Complete" Goren states that
in the bidding 1S-2NT it is not unusual, but shows a balanced hand
with 22-24 HCP plus S controls. Thus he treated it as equal to a 2NT
opening bid and old timers might think the same applies to 1NT-2NT.
Stig
\\
paul
When I read your question, I thought "that's silly, the standard
meaning of (1NT)-2NT is a cuebid, which partner initially takes as
weak with the minors but may be any powerful two-suiter." Then I
looked in the Bridge Encyclopedia and found no mention of this
treatment. Anyone have a clue where I might have picked that up?
henry...@yahoo.com
As far as I know, (1nt) 2nt as a qbid showing a huge two suiter is a
completely standard treatment. I am surprised that it does not show
in the Encyclopedia.
Perhaps it is the two-way feature you are remembering that is at issue
here. I don't personally remember that as being part of the standard
package.
Henrysun909
Douglas Newlands
>
> Thanks. I guess, it's just difficult for me to conceive of playing
> 1pear-(pass)-1grape-(1NT) as natural even though I know many do. To
> me the natual meaning expresses a deathwish, so the weak takeout must
> be intended. I have been alerting it. I just don't believe it makes
> sense to require it.
This is fine if you play in places where people have their bid. When
playing serious games in Oz, you have to be prepared for the fact that
(1 plum)-P-(1 grape) does not preclude your side having values for 3NT.
I prefer to play 1N as values (unless the earlier auction excludes that).
Doug,
Tasmania
Michael Angelo Ravera
I'd think that (1NT)-2NT would be self-alerting in the same manner
that doubles and cue bids are. General Bridge Knowledge states that,
even after an 8-10 1NT, that overcaller is unlikely to have 19 points
or anything like it (and it gets ever so much more rare with a 15-17
1NT). And if he did have such a hand, the *LAST* call that he'd be
likely to make is 2NT. (Double, pass and beat the snot out of them,
hope partner can protect you with a double and trap pass, and pass and
hope that responder makes a rescue bid that you can double for 2000
all come quickly to mind).
So, since GBK says "nobody in his right mind would play that as
natural", no alert should be required (Law 40). If an opponent has a
really weak hand with a long major and wants to be reassured that the
2NT doesn't somehow promise half the deck before competing at 3S, he
should click on the 2NT bid, write "2NT?" on the pad next to him, or
choke out the words "please explain ..." as is the appropriate way of
getting and explanation in his competition format or, better yet, have
a look at oppoents' convention card (assuming that it is completed
properly).
David Babcock
> When I read your question, I thought "that's silly, the standard
> meaning of (1NT)-2NT is a cuebid, which partner initially takes as
> weak with the minors but may be any powerful two-suiter." Then I
> looked in the Bridge Encyclopedia and found no mention of this
> treatment. Anyone have a clue where I might have picked that up?
Perhaps 2NT over a 1NT *overcall* was in the back of youi mind?
David
Derek Broughton
> On Nov 22, 12:32 pm, Stig Holmquist <stigfjor...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> The ACBL convention card seems to define the unusual NT as a jump bid
>> of 2NT over 1 ot a suit. It does not include 2 NT over 1 NT. Nor does
>> the ACBL Encyclopedia specifically mention 2 NT ove 1 NT as unusual.
>>
>> The Brozel convention treats 2NT over 1 NT as showing both minors and
>> thus might be alertable. Does the same rule apply to anybody bidding 2
>> NT as an overcall of 1 NT to show the two minors? Are both or neither
>> alertable? Where does ACBL clarify this use of 2 NT?
>
> When I read your question, I thought "that's silly, the standard
> meaning of (1NT)-2NT is a cuebid, which partner initially takes as
> weak with the minors but may be any powerful two-suiter." Then I
> looked in the Bridge Encyclopedia and found no mention of this
> treatment. Anyone have a clue where I might have picked that up?
The people I know who use (1N) 2N to show the minors usually alert it. All
overcalls over 1N on the ACBL convention card are red, suggesting that any
non-natural use of a suit OR NT bid is alertable, but it would also seem
that on the same grounds that cue-bids of opponent's suit aren't alertable,
it shouldn't be necessary to alert what is essentially a cue of opponent's
NT bid.
--
derek
Raija D
"Will in New Haven" <bill....@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote in message
news:66757d72-8bb4-4b0e...@n35g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
The second one 1H (P) 1S (1NT) is alertable only by unpassed hand, in ACBL.
This seems to indicate that the non-alertable meaning by an unpassed hand is
"strong NT overcall". No NT overcall by a passed hand is alertable, whether
direct or Sandwich position.
paul
I was thinking that, but the ACBL and the Bridge Encyclopedia don't
refer to "cue-bid of opponent's denomination", all references are to
"cue-bid of opponent's suit." There was some reference to using 2NT in
response to partner's overcall of notrump: (1NT)-2H-(P)-2NT as a "cue-
bid" where the quotation marks make it clear this isn't a routine use
of the word cue-bid.
So Henry had a similar impression as I, that (1NT)-2NT is in standard
usage a strong two-suiter. Is this an Acol treatment?
David Stevenson
Probably from the fact that quite a large number of players play it,
myself included. The Bridge Encyclopedia [sic] is not really
exhaustive, and has quite a lot of errors and omissions.
But I would not call it standard, merely a common alternative
treatment. I would say standard is both minors for the modernists, and
game forcing with a freak hand for the traditionalists.
--
David Stevenson Bridge RTFLB Cats Railways
Liverpool, England, UK Fax: +44 870 055 7697 ICQ: 20039682
<webj...@googlemail.com> bluejak on OKB
Bridgepage: http://blakjak.org/brg_menu.htm
Fred.
wrote:
When in a partnership that hasn't had an opportunity to work on
balancing situations you may be correct. With a regular partner, if I
can read the situation well enough to bid a natural 1NT with
reasonable safely in the middle, partner (or I) ought to be able to
read the same situation in the balancing seat. It's true that a
preemptive minor raise or major suit limit raise can sometimes hurt
us, but that's life.
I look at defending against psyches like doubling. If the opponents
aren't making 15 percent of their doubled contracts, I'm not doubling
enough, and if 15 percent of the psyches don't work on me, I'm
dropping too many points on defensive bidding.
The poker player and the bridge player who are determined never to be
bluffed are both losers. I like to bluff early for advertising value
in a new game, and don't much care if I get caught.
Fred.
Will in New Haven
> On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 16:04:10 -0800 (PST), Will in New Haven
>
>
>
>
>
Only an idiot would overcall 2NT in that situation to show points.
There are a great many meanings for 2NT over 1NT but there is no
"natural" meaning of the bid. I don't know what you mean by old-timers
but I was playing and winning on occasion in the Sixties, even the
late Fifties, and no one played a 2NT overcall of a 1NT opening bid as
a very strong balanced hand. For that matter, no one, not even people
playing Goren, played a 2NT over a one-bid as a strong balanced hand,
except in balancing position. Some played it as stoppers and a good,
long minor and others played it as unusual.
henry...@yahoo.com
The natural meaning of a 1nt overcall in the sandwich position is a
hand that wants to play 1nt. It will usually be strong and balanced
with a running suit. On your auction, it might show
Kxx
Axx
AKQTx
xx
Because that is a rare hand type, and because it is so dangerous to
make a natural 1nt overcall on a random 16 count like
KJx
AQx
AQxx
xxx
many partnerships have decided that it is more efficient to use it as
a two suited takeout, not shapely enough for a 2nt overcall.
In my view, that makes very good sense when one of the unbid suits is
spades, and some sense when one of the unbid suits is hearts.
But when they are claiming the majors and all we have to fight with is
the minors, I'd rather pass than overcall 1nt if I don't have enough
shape and playing strength to bid 2nt. As Freddy used to say, why
fight tanks with pillows?
Henrysun909
henry...@yahoo.com
> On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 16:04:10 -0800 (PST), Will in New Haven
>
>
>
Really?
Assuming, not without risk, that you are correctly reporting Goren's
view of (1s) 2nt as showing 33-35 hcps plus S controls, I find it hard
to believe that Goren would advocate the same thing after (1nt) 2nt.
Tell us, Stiggy, what does (1nt) double show in Goren's New Bridge
Complete?
Henrysun909
Adam Beneschan
<jackiegold...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Alerting a non-alert able bid is improper, and could result in a
> ruling against you.
No, that's a myth that I don't want to see spread at all. Please stop
telling people this. It is much better for players to alert if
they're not sure, as long as they don't go overboard to the point of
slowing down the game. I do not want to see players worrying about
whether they should alert or not, or worrying about whether they will
be penalized for alerting a nonalertable bid. That will lead to less
full disclosure.
In fact, has anyone EVER peen penalized for alerting a nonalertable
bid? It must be very rare, but I would not be at all surprised if the
number of times this has happened in the ACBL is zero.
-- Adam
Will in New Haven
One of my partners used to get frustrated when people alerted a
penalty double of our Weak NT, as that was, at least at the time, the
only non-alertable meaning. She thought it wasted her time when she
asked what the bid meant. But it still did no real harm. We never
asked that any of them be penalized.
Another pair, friends of ours, play various escape methods over
penalty doubles and "systems on" over "alertable" doubles of their
strong NT. They got crossed up by an alert once but they got a top, so
the director woudn't give them anything extra. Note, that they got
crossed up because they didn't _ask_
Derek Broughton
> On Nov 23, 9:03 am, Derek Broughton <de...@pointerstop.ca> wrote:
>> The people I know who use (1N) 2N to show the minors usually alert it.
>> All overcalls over 1N on the ACBL convention card are red, suggesting
>> that any non-natural use of a suit OR NT bid is alertable, but it would
>> also seem that on the same grounds that cue-bids of opponent's suit
>> aren't alertable, it shouldn't be necessary to alert what is essentially
>> a cue of opponent's NT bid.
>
> I was thinking that, but the ACBL and the Bridge Encyclopedia don't
> refer to "cue-bid of opponent's denomination", all references are to
> "cue-bid of opponent's suit."
Exactly - I meant that I _personally_ don't think it should be alertable,
for the same reasons as suit cue-bids - but that afaict it is.
> So Henry had a similar impression as I, that (1NT)-2NT is in standard
> usage a strong two-suiter. Is this an Acol treatment?
I don't think _that's_ standard either - and it's just as alertable as
meaning it as weak for the minors.
--
derek
Derek Broughton
> On Nov 22, 4:48 pm, "jackiegold...@gmail.com"
> <jackiegold...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Alerting a non-alert able bid is improper, and could result in a
>> ruling against you.
>
> No, that's a myth that I don't want to see spread at all.
In the first place, the ACBL says to alert if you are unsure. In the
second, this was specifically with respect to alerting against novices -
where it's a reasonably safe bet that any UI imparted to the player whose
bid was alerted is far less than the novices' need to know something odd is
happening. Sounds like active ethics to me. I think that experienced
players who would alert specifically to help out novices are pretty likely
to handle UI correctly.
--
derek
paul
wrote:
> Bridgepage:http://blakjak.org/brg_menu.htm
Any source for the "game forcing with a freak hand" treatment?
henry...@yahoo.com
ROFL, obviously 33-35 was intended to be 22-24.
Stupid fingering error.....
Henrysun909
David Stevenson
>On Nov 23, 9:47�am, David Stevenson <brid...@nospam.demon.co.uk>
>wrote:
>> paul wrote
>>
>>
>>
>> >On Nov 22, 12:32�pm, Stig Holmquist <stigfjor...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >> The ACBL convention card seems to define the unusual NT as a jump bid
>> >> of 2NT over 1 ot a suit. �It does not include 2 NT over 1 NT. Nor does
>> >> the ACBL Encyclopedia specifically mention 2 NT ove 1 NT as unusual.
>>
>> >> The Brozel convention treats 2NT over 1 NT as showing �both minors and
>> >> thus might be alertable. Does the same rule apply to anybody bidding 2
>> >> NT as an overcall of 1 NT to show the two minors? Are both or neither
>> >> alertable? Where does ACBL clarify this use of 2 NT?
>>
>> >> Stig Holmquist
>>
>> >When I read your question, I thought "that's silly, the standard
>> >meaning of (1NT)-2NT is a cuebid, which partner initially takes as
>> >weak with the minors but may be any powerful two-suiter." Then I
>> >looked in the Bridge Encyclopedia and found no mention of this
>> >treatment. Anyone have a clue where I might have picked that up?
>>
>> � �Probably from the fact that quite a large number of players play it,
>> myself included. � The Bridge Encyclopedia [sic] is not really
>> exhaustive, and has quite a lot of errors and omissions.
>>
>> � �But I would not call it standard, merely a common alternative
>> treatment. �I would say standard is both minors for the modernists, and
>> game forcing with a freak hand for the traditionalists.
>Any source for the "game forcing with a freak hand" treatment?
When I was young I learnt the game from American sources [Culbertson]
and later from English sources [Barrow & Lederer, the CAB book, and so
on]. At that time "everyone" played it as strong and freakish.
--
David Stevenson Bridge RTFLB Cats Railways
Liverpool, England, UK Fax: +44 870 055 7697 ICQ: 20039682
<webj...@googlemail.com> bluejak on OKB
Bridgepage: http://blakjak.org/brg_menu.htm
Stig Holmquist
<bill....@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote:
>On Nov 22, 9:43锟絧m, Stig Holmquist <stigfjor...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 16:04:10 -0800 (PST), Will in New Haven
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote:
>> >On Nov 22, 6:18锟絧m, "Fred." <ghrno-goo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >> On Nov 22, 6:05锟絧m, Will in New Haven
>>
>> >> <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote:
>> >> > On Nov 22, 6:01锟絧m, "Fred." <ghrno-goo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> > > On Nov 22, 12:32锟絧m, Stig Holmquist <stigfjor...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> > > > The ACBL convention card seems to define the unusual NT as a jump bid
>> >> > > > of 2NT over 1 ot a suit. 锟絀t does not include 2 NT over 1 NT. Nor does
>> >> > > > the ACBL Encyclopedia specifically mention 2 NT ove 1 NT as unusual.
>>
>> >> > > > The Brozel convention treats 2NT over 1 NT as showing 锟絙oth minors and
>> >> > > > thus might be alertable. Does the same rule apply to anybody bidding 2
>> >> > > > NT as an overcall of 1 NT to show the two minors? Are both or neither
>> >> > > > alertable? Where does ACBL clarify this use of 2 NT?
>>
>> >> > > > Stig Holmquist
>>
>> >> > > I can't absolutely swear it's the current alert procedure since it I
>> >> > > cant' find a date but I find at 锟絟ttp://www.acbl.org/play/alert.html
>> >> > > in PART IX: DEFENSIVE AND COMPETITIVE CALLS states
>> >> > > "Non-jump unusual notrump bids below 4NT, except those made by a
>> >> > > passed hand, must be Alerted".
>>
>> >> > > I assume that this includes both 1NT-(2NT) and 1H-(P)-1S-(1NT), both
>> >> > > of which I'd think should be alerted if they're not unusual no-trump.
>>
>> >> > The second one must be alerted if it _is_ an unusual NT. The rules you
>> >> > quoted indicate that the first one should be alerted but at least some
>> >> > ACBL directors don't seem to think so.
>>
>> >> > --
>> >> > Will in New Haven- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> >> > - Show quoted text -
>>
>> >> What do you take the normal understanding for 1H-(pass)-1S-(1NT) to be
>> >> then?
>>
>> >If it isn't alerted, it's a balanced hand and some sort of point count
>> >range, usually strong. It is likely that there are some fields where
>> >some sort of takeout for the unbid suits would be more common and I
>> >play it that way myself but there is an expected meaning, absent an
>> >alert. I think that the reason no one alerts, and directors don't
>> >expect you to alert, (1NT) - 2NT is that there isn't any other common
>> >way to play it. It is a very usual Unusual Notrump.
>>
>> In the last edition of "Goren's New Bridge Complete" Goren states that
>> in the bidding 1S-2NT it is not unusual, but shows a balanced hand
>> with 22-24 HCP plus S controls. Thus he treated it as equal to a 2NT
>> opening bid and 锟給ld timers might think the same applies to 1NT-2NT.
>
>Only an idiot would overcall 2NT in that situation to show points.
>There are a great many meanings for 2NT over 1NT but there is no
>"natural" meaning of the bid. I don't know what you mean by old-timers
>but I was playing and winning on occasion in the Sixties, even the
>late Fifties, and no one played a 2NT overcall of a 1NT opening bid as
>a very strong balanced hand. For that matter, no one, not even people
>playing Goren, played a 2NT over a one-bid as a strong balanced hand,
>except in balancing position. Some played it as stoppers and a good,
>long minor and others played it as unusual.
Read p.191 at the middle and tell me if Goren was the only one
bidding 2NT directly over 1 M showing 22-24 HCP balanced hand.
It was not a new treatment by Goren, who had written it in previous
editiions. I'll let you explain where he got it from.
Stig Holmquist
<henry...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Nov 23, 7:32锟絘m, "henrysun...@yahoo.com" <henrysun...@yahoo.com>
>wrote:
>> On Nov 22, 6:43锟絧m, Stig Holmquist <stigfjor...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 16:04:10 -0800 (PST), Will in New Haven
>>
>> > <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote:
>> > >On Nov 22, 6:18锟絧m, "Fred." <ghrno-goo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> > >> On Nov 22, 6:05锟絧m, Will in New Haven
>>
>> > >> <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote:
>> > >> > On Nov 22, 6:01锟絧m, "Fred." <ghrno-goo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> > >> > > On Nov 22, 12:32锟絧m, Stig Holmquist <stigfjor...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > >> > > > The ACBL convention card seems to define the unusual NT as a jump bid
>> > >> > > > of 2NT over 1 ot a suit. 锟絀t does not include 2 NT over 1 NT. Nor does
>> > >> > > > the ACBL Encyclopedia specifically mention 2 NT ove 1 NT as unusual.
>>
>> > >> > > > The Brozel convention treats 2NT over 1 NT as showing 锟絙oth minors and
>> > >> > > > thus might be alertable. Does the same rule apply to anybody bidding 2
>> > >> > > > NT as an overcall of 1 NT to show the two minors? Are both or neither
>> > >> > > > alertable? Where does ACBL clarify this use of 2 NT?
>>
>> > >> > > > Stig Holmquist
>>
>> > >> > > I can't absolutely swear it's the current alert procedure since it I
>> > >> > > cant' find a date but I find at 锟絟ttp://www.acbl.org/play/alert.html
>> > >> > > in PART IX: DEFENSIVE AND COMPETITIVE CALLS states
>> > >> > > "Non-jump unusual notrump bids below 4NT, except those made by a
>> > >> > > passed hand, must be Alerted".
>>
>> > >> > > I assume that this includes both 1NT-(2NT) and 1H-(P)-1S-(1NT), both
>> > >> > > of which I'd think should be alerted if they're not unusual no-trump.
>>
>> > >> > The second one must be alerted if it _is_ an unusual NT. The rules you
>> > >> > quoted indicate that the first one should be alerted but at least some
>> > >> > ACBL directors don't seem to think so.
>>
>> > >> > --
>> > >> > Will in New Haven- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> > >> > - Show quoted text -
>>
>> > >> What do you take the normal understanding for 1H-(pass)-1S-(1NT) to be
>> > >> then?
>>
>> > >If it isn't alerted, it's a balanced hand and some sort of point count
>> > >range, usually strong. It is likely that there are some fields where
>> > >some sort of takeout for the unbid suits would be more common and I
>> > >play it that way myself but there is an expected meaning, absent an
>> > >alert. I think that the reason no one alerts, and directors don't
>> > >expect you to alert, (1NT) - 2NT is that there isn't any other common
>> > >way to play it. It is a very usual Unusual Notrump.
>>
>> > In the last edition of "Goren's New Bridge Complete" Goren states that
>> > in the bidding 1S-2NT it is not unusual, but shows a balanced hand
>> > with 22-24 HCP plus S controls. Thus he treated it as equal to a 2NT
>> > opening bid and 锟給ld timers might think the same applies to 1NT-2NT.
>>
>> > Stig
>>
>> > \\
>>
>> Really?
>>
>> Assuming, not without risk, that you are correctly reporting Goren's
>> view of (1s) 2nt as showing 33-35 hcps plus S controls, I find it hard
>> to believe that Goren would advocate the same thing after (1nt) 2nt.
>>
>> Tell us, Stiggy, what does (1nt) double show in Goren's New Bridge
>> Complete?
>>
>> Henrysun909
>
>ROFL, obviously 33-35 was intended to be 22-24.
>
>Stupid fingering error.....
>
>Henrysun909
Stupid is as stupid does, to quote a well known phrase.
Will in New Haven
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 07:18:16 -0800 (PST), Will in New Haven
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Nov 22, 9:43 pm, Stig Holmquist <stigfjor...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 16:04:10 -0800 (PST), Will in New Haven
>
> >> <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote:
> >> >> On Nov 22, 6:05 pm, Will in New Haven
>
> >> >> <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote:
> >> >> > On Nov 22, 6:01 pm, "Fred." <ghrno-goo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> > > On Nov 22, 12:32 pm, Stig Holmquist <stigfjor...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> > > > The ACBL convention card seems to define the unusual NT as a jump bid
> >> >> > > > the ACBL Encyclopedia specifically mention 2 NT ove 1 NT as unusual.
>
> >> >> > > > thus might be alertable. Does the same rule apply to anybody bidding 2
> >> >> > > > NT as an overcall of 1 NT to show the two minors? Are both or neither
> >> >> > > > alertable? Where does ACBL clarify this use of 2 NT?
>
> >> >> > > > Stig Holmquist
>
> >> >> > > I can't absolutely swear it's the current alert procedure since it I
> >> >> > > in PART IX: DEFENSIVE AND COMPETITIVE CALLS states
> >> >> > > "Non-jump unusual notrump bids below 4NT, except those made by a
> >> >> > > passed hand, must be Alerted".
>
> >> >> > > I assume that this includes both 1NT-(2NT) and 1H-(P)-1S-(1NT), both
> >> >> > > of which I'd think should be alerted if they're not unusual no-trump.
>
> >> >> > The second one must be alerted if it _is_ an unusual NT. The rules you
> >> >> > quoted indicate that the first one should be alerted but at least some
> >> >> > ACBL directors don't seem to think so.
>
> >> >> > --
> >> >> > Will in New Haven- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> >> > - Show quoted text -
>
> >> >> What do you take the normal understanding for 1H-(pass)-1S-(1NT) to be
> >> >> then?
>
> >> >If it isn't alerted, it's a balanced hand and some sort of point count
> >> >range, usually strong. It is likely that there are some fields where
> >> >some sort of takeout for the unbid suits would be more common and I
> >> >play it that way myself but there is an expected meaning, absent an
> >> >alert. I think that the reason no one alerts, and directors don't
> >> >expect you to alert, (1NT) - 2NT is that there isn't any other common
> >> >way to play it. It is a very usual Unusual Notrump.
>
> >> In the last edition of "Goren's New Bridge Complete" Goren states that
> >> in the bidding 1S-2NT it is not unusual, but shows a balanced hand
> >> with 22-24 HCP plus S controls. Thus he treated it as equal to a 2NT
>
> >Only an idiot would overcall 2NT in that situation to show points.
> >There are a great many meanings for 2NT over 1NT but there is no
> >"natural" meaning of the bid. I don't know what you mean by old-timers
> >but I was playing and winning on occasion in the Sixties, even the
> >late Fifties, and no one played a 2NT overcall of a 1NT opening bid as
> >a very strong balanced hand. For that matter, no one, not even people
> >playing Goren, played a 2NT over a one-bid as a strong balanced hand,
> >except in balancing position. Some played it as stoppers and a good,
> >long minor and others played it as unusual.
>
> Read p.191 at the middle and tell me if Goren was the only one
> bidding 2NT directly over 1 M showing 22-24 HCP balanced hand.
> It was not a new treatment by Goren, who had written it in previous
> editiions. I'll let you explain where he got it from.
I won't argue that it was a totally unknown concept over a one-bid in
a suit. It had been largely _rejected_ by tournament players,
including those who thought they were playing Goren but it was
certainly not a new treatment. Over _1NT_ it was unknown.
Douglas Newlands
> On Nov 23, 12:30 am, Douglas Newlands <douglas.newla...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> Fred. wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks. I guess, it's just difficult for me to conceive of playing
>>> 1pear-(pass)-1grape-(1NT) as natural even though I know many do. To
>>> me the natual meaning expresses a deathwish, so the weak takeout must
>>> be intended. I have been alerting it. I just don't believe it makes
>>> sense to require it.
>> This is fine if you play in places where people have their bid. When
>> playing serious games in Oz, you have to be prepared for the fact that
>> (1 plum)-P-(1 grape) does not preclude your side having values for 3NT.
>> I prefer to play 1N as values (unless the earlier auction excludes that).
>>
>> Doug,
>> Tasmania
>
> When in a partnership that hasn't had an opportunity to work on
> balancing situations you may be correct. With a regular partner, if I
> can read the situation well enough to bid a natural 1NT with
> reasonable safely in the middle, partner (or I) ought to be able to
> read the same situation in the balancing seat. It's true that a
> preemptive minor raise or major suit limit raise can sometimes hurt
> us, but that's life.
If the auction goes, say,
(1D)-P-(1S)-1NT we are in the auction somewhat safely but after
(1D)-P-(1S)-P
(2D) partner is not balancing and the auction is still live
so he won't come in and if it continues
(1D)-P-(1S)-P
(2D)-P (P) to me, my entry to the auction is much more fraught
perhaps not possible and partner doesn't get another bid an
It's nothing to do with psyches or bluffing.
If you play in a milieu where openings and responses are s(t)olid, then
playing 1NT conventionally will be fine if you can count on them for 12
and 6 in the above auctions.
In competitions I play in, people open 10-11 counts with shape and
occasional 8 or 9 counts and respond on next to nothing.
You may write them of as unsound but that doesn't help your score.
> I look at defending against psyches like doubling. If the opponents
> aren't making 15 percent of their doubled contracts, I'm not doubling
> enough, and if 15 percent of the psyches don't work on me, I'm
> dropping too many points on defensive bidding.
I am not sure why this is here, I am not talking about psyching just a
lighter opening style. I know there are plenty correspondents here who
advocate a solid style but it's not the only way to play. If it was
obviously better everyone would play that way.
OTOH look at system cards for recent BBs, olympiads etc and see how many
solid openers there are. Zia-Rosenberg are the only definite solid
openers and the field is full of CCs saying light openers.
Doug,
Tasmania
henry...@yahoo.com
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 11:38:07 -0800 (PST), "henrysun...@yahoo.com"
>
>
>
> <henrysun...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >On Nov 23, 7:32 am, "henrysun...@yahoo.com" <henrysun...@yahoo.com>
> >wrote:
> >> On Nov 22, 6:43 pm, Stig Holmquist <stigfjor...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> > On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 16:04:10 -0800 (PST), Will in New Haven
>
> >> > <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote:
> >> > >> On Nov 22, 6:05 pm, Will in New Haven
>
> >> > >> <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote:
> >> > >> > On Nov 22, 6:01 pm, "Fred." <ghrno-goo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >> > >> > > On Nov 22, 12:32 pm, Stig Holmquist <stigfjor...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> > >> > > > The ACBL convention card seems to define the unusual NT as a jump bid
> >> > >> > > > the ACBL Encyclopedia specifically mention 2 NT ove 1 NT as unusual.
>
> >> > >> > > > thus might be alertable. Does the same rule apply to anybody bidding 2
> >> > >> > > > NT as an overcall of 1 NT to show the two minors? Are both or neither
> >> > >> > > > alertable? Where does ACBL clarify this use of 2 NT?
>
> >> > >> > > > Stig Holmquist
>
> >> > >> > > I can't absolutely swear it's the current alert procedure since it I
> >> > >> > > in PART IX: DEFENSIVE AND COMPETITIVE CALLS states
> >> > >> > > "Non-jump unusual notrump bids below 4NT, except those made by a
> >> > >> > > passed hand, must be Alerted".
>
> >> > >> > > I assume that this includes both 1NT-(2NT) and 1H-(P)-1S-(1NT), both
> >> > >> > > of which I'd think should be alerted if they're not unusual no-trump.
>
> >> > >> > The second one must be alerted if it _is_ an unusual NT. The rules you
> >> > >> > quoted indicate that the first one should be alerted but at least some
> >> > >> > ACBL directors don't seem to think so.
>
> >> > >> > --
> >> > >> > Will in New Haven- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> > >> > - Show quoted text -
>
> >> > >> What do you take the normal understanding for 1H-(pass)-1S-(1NT) to be
> >> > >> then?
>
> >> > >If it isn't alerted, it's a balanced hand and some sort of point count
> >> > >range, usually strong. It is likely that there are some fields where
> >> > >some sort of takeout for the unbid suits would be more common and I
> >> > >play it that way myself but there is an expected meaning, absent an
> >> > >alert. I think that the reason no one alerts, and directors don't
> >> > >expect you to alert, (1NT) - 2NT is that there isn't any other common
> >> > >way to play it. It is a very usual Unusual Notrump.
>
> >> > In the last edition of "Goren's New Bridge Complete" Goren states that
> >> > in the bidding 1S-2NT it is not unusual, but shows a balanced hand
> >> > with 22-24 HCP plus S controls. Thus he treated it as equal to a 2NT
>
> >> > Stig
>
> >> > \\
>
> >> Really?
>
> >> Assuming, not without risk, that you are correctly reporting Goren's
> >> view of (1s) 2nt as showing 33-35 hcps plus S controls, I find it hard
> >> to believe that Goren would advocate the same thing after (1nt) 2nt.
>
> >> Tell us, Stiggy, what does (1nt) double show in Goren's New Bridge
> >> Complete?
>
> >> Henrysun909
>
> >ROFL, obviously 33-35 was intended to be 22-24.
>
> >Stupid fingering error.....
>
> >Henrysun909
>
> Stupid is as stupid does, to quote a well known phrase.
Perhaps, but I'm still waiting for you to tell me what (1nt) dbl means
in your edition of Goren's Bridge Complete.
I'm guessing it isn't takeout.
And if we are going to contract to take 8 tricks in NT, leaving 5 for
the other side, why would we not want to defend 1ntx down 2?
Henrysun909
henry...@yahoo.com
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 11:38:07 -0800 (PST), "henrysun...@yahoo.com"
>
>
>
> <henrysun...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >On Nov 23, 7:32 am, "henrysun...@yahoo.com" <henrysun...@yahoo.com>
> >wrote:
> >> On Nov 22, 6:43 pm, Stig Holmquist <stigfjor...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> > On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 16:04:10 -0800 (PST), Will in New Haven
>
> >> > <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote:
> >> > >> On Nov 22, 6:05 pm, Will in New Haven
>
> >> > >> <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote:
> >> > >> > On Nov 22, 6:01 pm, "Fred." <ghrno-goo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >> > >> > > On Nov 22, 12:32 pm, Stig Holmquist <stigfjor...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> > >> > > > The ACBL convention card seems to define the unusual NT as a jump bid
> >> > >> > > > the ACBL Encyclopedia specifically mention 2 NT ove 1 NT as unusual.
>
> >> > >> > > > thus might be alertable. Does the same rule apply to anybody bidding 2
> >> > >> > > > NT as an overcall of 1 NT to show the two minors? Are both or neither
> >> > >> > > > alertable? Where does ACBL clarify this use of 2 NT?
>
> >> > >> > > > Stig Holmquist
>
> >> > >> > > I can't absolutely swear it's the current alert procedure since it I
> >> > >> > > in PART IX: DEFENSIVE AND COMPETITIVE CALLS states
> >> > >> > > "Non-jump unusual notrump bids below 4NT, except those made by a
> >> > >> > > passed hand, must be Alerted".
>
> >> > >> > > I assume that this includes both 1NT-(2NT) and 1H-(P)-1S-(1NT), both
> >> > >> > > of which I'd think should be alerted if they're not unusual no-trump.
>
> >> > >> > The second one must be alerted if it _is_ an unusual NT. The rules you
> >> > >> > quoted indicate that the first one should be alerted but at least some
> >> > >> > ACBL directors don't seem to think so.
>
> >> > >> > --
> >> > >> > Will in New Haven- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> > >> > - Show quoted text -
>
> >> > >> What do you take the normal understanding for 1H-(pass)-1S-(1NT) to be
> >> > >> then?
>
> >> > >If it isn't alerted, it's a balanced hand and some sort of point count
> >> > >range, usually strong. It is likely that there are some fields where
> >> > >some sort of takeout for the unbid suits would be more common and I
> >> > >play it that way myself but there is an expected meaning, absent an
> >> > >alert. I think that the reason no one alerts, and directors don't
> >> > >expect you to alert, (1NT) - 2NT is that there isn't any other common
> >> > >way to play it. It is a very usual Unusual Notrump.
>
> >> > In the last edition of "Goren's New Bridge Complete" Goren states that
> >> > in the bidding 1S-2NT it is not unusual, but shows a balanced hand
> >> > with 22-24 HCP plus S controls. Thus he treated it as equal to a 2NT
>
> >> > Stig
>
> >> > \\
>
> >> Really?
>
> >> Assuming, not without risk, that you are correctly reporting Goren's
> >> view of (1s) 2nt as showing 33-35 hcps plus S controls, I find it hard
> >> to believe that Goren would advocate the same thing after (1nt) 2nt.
>
> >> Tell us, Stiggy, what does (1nt) double show in Goren's New Bridge
> >> Complete?
>
> >> Henrysun909
>
> >ROFL, obviously 33-35 was intended to be 22-24.
>
> >Stupid fingering error.....
>
> >Henrysun909
>
> Stupid is as stupid does, to quote a well known phrase.
But there is one thing this response shows: how predictable you are!
When faced with an argument of substance, you devolve either (1) to
insulting the poster, or (2) focusing on a typographical error without
(3) addressing the substantive argument in the slightest.
So tell us again, why you think an old timer might treat (1nt) 2nt as
showing 22-24 balanced?
Thinking that someone would confuse the two sequences is like someone,
knowing that there are centers in football and centers in basketball,
worrying that someone might get the two of them confused when watching
a game.
Only someone who didn't understand the game could even entertain such
a notion.
Henrysun909
Stig Holmquist
<henry...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Nov 23, 12:21锟絧m, Stig Holmquist <stigfjor...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 11:38:07 -0800 (PST), "henrysun...@yahoo.com"
>>
>>
>>
>> <henrysun...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >On Nov 23, 7:32锟絘m, "henrysun...@yahoo.com" <henrysun...@yahoo.com>
>> >wrote:
>> >> On Nov 22, 6:43锟絧m, Stig Holmquist <stigfjor...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> > On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 16:04:10 -0800 (PST), Will in New Haven
>>
>> >> > <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote:
>> >> > >On Nov 22, 6:18锟絧m, "Fred." <ghrno-goo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >> > >> On Nov 22, 6:05锟絧m, Will in New Haven
>>
>> >> > >> <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote:
>> >> > >> > On Nov 22, 6:01锟絧m, "Fred." <ghrno-goo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> > >> > > On Nov 22, 12:32锟絧m, Stig Holmquist <stigfjor...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> > >> > > > The ACBL convention card seems to define the unusual NT as a jump bid
>> >> > >> > > > of 2NT over 1 ot a suit. 锟絀t does not include 2 NT over 1 NT. Nor does
>> >> > >> > > > the ACBL Encyclopedia specifically mention 2 NT ove 1 NT as unusual.
>>
>> >> > >> > > > The Brozel convention treats 2NT over 1 NT as showing 锟絙oth minors and
>> >> > >> > > > thus might be alertable. Does the same rule apply to anybody bidding 2
>> >> > >> > > > NT as an overcall of 1 NT to show the two minors? Are both or neither
>> >> > >> > > > alertable? Where does ACBL clarify this use of 2 NT?
>>
>> >> > >> > > > Stig Holmquist
>>
>> >> > >> > > I can't absolutely swear it's the current alert procedure since it I
>> >> > >> > > cant' find a date but I find at 锟絟ttp://www.acbl.org/play/alert.html
>> >> > >> > > in PART IX: DEFENSIVE AND COMPETITIVE CALLS states
>> >> > >> > > "Non-jump unusual notrump bids below 4NT, except those made by a
>> >> > >> > > passed hand, must be Alerted".
>>
>> >> > >> > > I assume that this includes both 1NT-(2NT) and 1H-(P)-1S-(1NT), both
>> >> > >> > > of which I'd think should be alerted if they're not unusual no-trump.
>>
>> >> > >> > The second one must be alerted if it _is_ an unusual NT. The rules you
>> >> > >> > quoted indicate that the first one should be alerted but at least some
>> >> > >> > ACBL directors don't seem to think so.
>>
>> >> > >> > --
>> >> > >> > Will in New Haven- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> >> > >> > - Show quoted text -
>>
>> >> > >> What do you take the normal understanding for 1H-(pass)-1S-(1NT) to be
>> >> > >> then?
>>
>> >> > >If it isn't alerted, it's a balanced hand and some sort of point count
>> >> > >range, usually strong. It is likely that there are some fields where
>> >> > >some sort of takeout for the unbid suits would be more common and I
>> >> > >play it that way myself but there is an expected meaning, absent an
>> >> > >alert. I think that the reason no one alerts, and directors don't
>> >> > >expect you to alert, (1NT) - 2NT is that there isn't any other common
>> >> > >way to play it. It is a very usual Unusual Notrump.
>>
>> >> > In the last edition of "Goren's New Bridge Complete" Goren states that
>> >> > in the bidding 1S-2NT it is not unusual, but shows a balanced hand
>> >> > with 22-24 HCP plus S controls. Thus he treated it as equal to a 2NT
>> >> > opening bid and 锟給ld timers might think the same applies to 1NT-2NT.
You should know by now that I don't engage in discussion, argument or
exchange of ideas with shitheads like you, who insist on distortring
my name for the purpose of redicule. Doing the same thing over and
over again expecting a different outcome is the very definition of
stupidity, and you fit the bill.I'm not likely to respond to any
question from you before Helll freezes over. Keep making an ass of
yourself if it makes you feel good.Only masochists do that. Get it
through your narrow mind that I'll not dignify any question from you
or your cohorts wwith a response. Get it?
Stig Holmquist
henry...@yahoo.com
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 16:59:08 -0800 (PST), "henrysun...@yahoo.com"
>
>
>
> <henrysun...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >On Nov 23, 12:21 pm, Stig Holmquist <stigfjor...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 11:38:07 -0800 (PST), "henrysun...@yahoo.com"
>
> >> <henrysun...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> >wrote:
> >> >> On Nov 22, 6:43 pm, Stig Holmquist <stigfjor...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> > On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 16:04:10 -0800 (PST), Will in New Haven
>
> >> >> > <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote:
> >> >> > >> On Nov 22, 6:05 pm, Will in New Haven
>
> >> >> > >> <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote:
> >> >> > >> > On Nov 22, 6:01 pm, "Fred." <ghrno-goo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> > >> > > On Nov 22, 12:32 pm, Stig Holmquist <stigfjor...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> > >> > > > The ACBL convention card seems to define the unusual NT as a jump bid
> >> >> > >> > > > the ACBL Encyclopedia specifically mention 2 NT ove 1 NT as unusual.
>
> >> >> > >> > > > thus might be alertable. Does the same rule apply to anybody bidding 2
> >> >> > >> > > > NT as an overcall of 1 NT to show the two minors? Are both or neither
> >> >> > >> > > > alertable? Where does ACBL clarify this use of 2 NT?
>
> >> >> > >> > > > Stig Holmquist
>
> >> >> > >> > > I can't absolutely swear it's the current alert procedure since it I
> >> >> > >> > > in PART IX: DEFENSIVE AND COMPETITIVE CALLS states
> >> >> > >> > > "Non-jump unusual notrump bids below 4NT, except those made by a
> >> >> > >> > > passed hand, must be Alerted".
>
> >> >> > >> > > I assume that this includes both 1NT-(2NT) and 1H-(P)-1S-(1NT), both
> >> >> > >> > > of which I'd think should be alerted if they're not unusual no-trump.
>
> >> >> > >> > The second one must be alerted if it _is_ an unusual NT. The rules you
> >> >> > >> > quoted indicate that the first one should be alerted but at least some
> >> >> > >> > ACBL directors don't seem to think so.
>
> >> >> > >> > --
> >> >> > >> > Will in New Haven- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> >> > >> > - Show quoted text -
>
> >> >> > >> What do you take the normal understanding for 1H-(pass)-1S-(1NT) to be
> >> >> > >> then?
>
> >> >> > >If it isn't alerted, it's a balanced hand and some sort of point count
> >> >> > >range, usually strong. It is likely that there are some fields where
> >> >> > >some sort of takeout for the unbid suits would be more common and I
> >> >> > >play it that way myself but there is an expected meaning, absent an
> >> >> > >alert. I think that the reason no one alerts, and directors don't
> >> >> > >expect you to alert, (1NT) - 2NT is that there isn't any other common
> >> >> > >way to play it. It is a very usual Unusual Notrump.
>
> >> >> > In the last edition of "Goren's New Bridge Complete" Goren states that
> >> >> > in the bidding 1S-2NT it is not unusual, but shows a balanced hand
> >> >> > with 22-24 HCP plus S controls. Thus he treated it as equal to a 2NT
Yeah.
Calling people names is always the last bastion of losers (shrug).
Perhaps I'll go to the library and do the research you are unable to
do yourself.
Henrysun909
KWSchneider
We have the same dilemma - we solved by asking if the double was
forcing [actually not passable]. Alertable doubles don't explain
everything...
If the double is NOT passable, then systems are off.
Cheers,
Kurt
KWSchneider
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 16:59:08 -0800 (PST), "henrysun...@yahoo.com"
>
>
>
> <henrysun...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >On Nov 23, 12:21 pm, Stig Holmquist <stigfjor...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 11:38:07 -0800 (PST), "henrysun...@yahoo.com"
>
> >> <henrysun...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> >wrote:
> >> >> On Nov 22, 6:43 pm, Stig Holmquist <stigfjor...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> > On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 16:04:10 -0800 (PST), Will in New Haven
>
> >> >> > <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote:
> >> >> > >> On Nov 22, 6:05 pm, Will in New Haven
>
> >> >> > >> <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote:
> >> >> > >> > On Nov 22, 6:01 pm, "Fred." <ghrno-goo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> > >> > > On Nov 22, 12:32 pm, Stig Holmquist <stigfjor...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> > >> > > > The ACBL convention card seems to define the unusual NT as a jump bid
> >> >> > >> > > > the ACBL Encyclopedia specifically mention 2 NT ove 1 NT as unusual.
>
> >> >> > >> > > > thus might be alertable. Does the same rule apply to anybody bidding 2
> >> >> > >> > > > NT as an overcall of 1 NT to show the two minors? Are both or neither
> >> >> > >> > > > alertable? Where does ACBL clarify this use of 2 NT?
>
> >> >> > >> > > > Stig Holmquist
>
> >> >> > >> > > I can't absolutely swear it's the current alert procedure since it I
> >> >> > >> > > in PART IX: DEFENSIVE AND COMPETITIVE CALLS states
> >> >> > >> > > "Non-jump unusual notrump bids below 4NT, except those made by a
> >> >> > >> > > passed hand, must be Alerted".
>
> >> >> > >> > > I assume that this includes both 1NT-(2NT) and 1H-(P)-1S-(1NT), both
> >> >> > >> > > of which I'd think should be alerted if they're not unusual no-trump.
>
> >> >> > >> > The second one must be alerted if it _is_ an unusual NT. The rules you
> >> >> > >> > quoted indicate that the first one should be alerted but at least some
> >> >> > >> > ACBL directors don't seem to think so.
>
> >> >> > >> > --
> >> >> > >> > Will in New Haven- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> >> > >> > - Show quoted text -
>
> >> >> > >> What do you take the normal understanding for 1H-(pass)-1S-(1NT) to be
> >> >> > >> then?
>
> >> >> > >If it isn't alerted, it's a balanced hand and some sort of point count
> >> >> > >range, usually strong. It is likely that there are some fields where
> >> >> > >some sort of takeout for the unbid suits would be more common and I
> >> >> > >play it that way myself but there is an expected meaning, absent an
> >> >> > >alert. I think that the reason no one alerts, and directors don't
> >> >> > >expect you to alert, (1NT) - 2NT is that there isn't any other common
> >> >> > >way to play it. It is a very usual Unusual Notrump.
>
> >> >> > In the last edition of "Goren's New Bridge Complete" Goren states that
> >> >> > in the bidding 1S-2NT it is not unusual, but shows a balanced hand
> >> >> > with 22-24 HCP plus S controls. Thus he treated it as equal to a 2NT
I'm not sure that you indulge in discussion, argument or exchanges of
ideas with anyone who disagrees with you.
Quite frankly, I've now figured out how you measure yourself on RGB
[and apparently as a bridge player]. How many posts you can derive,
plain and simple. It's all about self esteem, apparently.
If you can't get a large number of posts through an arbitrary
misreading or intentional misrepresentation of a fact or concept, you
then populate your postings with rants and insults, and then devolve
into officious slander.
But, hey, you do get your post count up there. I've got to hand it to
you. Look, I've added one more. Maybe you can get this over the magic
100 mark...
Kurt
Frisbieinstein
I recently played against a pair who alerted EVERY artificial bid,
even RKCB. It annoyed me, and I thought it gave them an advantage in
that an artificial bid could never go unnoticed. I asked them to
stop, no luck (though I don't really speak the language, so maybe they
didn't understand). I got my revenge when I doubled an artificial 2D
bid as a lead director. They were outraged. What are you doing! You
can't double that! It's artificial! We explained all this!
henry...@yahoo.com
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 16:59:08 -0800 (PST), "henrysun...@yahoo.com"
>
>
>
> <henrysun...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >On Nov 23, 12:21 pm, Stig Holmquist <stigfjor...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 11:38:07 -0800 (PST), "henrysun...@yahoo.com"
>
> >> <henrysun...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> >wrote:
> >> >> On Nov 22, 6:43 pm, Stig Holmquist <stigfjor...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> > On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 16:04:10 -0800 (PST), Will in New Haven
>
> >> >> > <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote:
> >> >> > >> On Nov 22, 6:05 pm, Will in New Haven
>
> >> >> > >> <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote:
> >> >> > >> > On Nov 22, 6:01 pm, "Fred." <ghrno-goo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> > >> > > On Nov 22, 12:32 pm, Stig Holmquist <stigfjor...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> > >> > > > The ACBL convention card seems to define the unusual NT as a jump bid
> >> >> > >> > > > the ACBL Encyclopedia specifically mention 2 NT ove 1 NT as unusual.
>
> >> >> > >> > > > thus might be alertable. Does the same rule apply to anybody bidding 2
> >> >> > >> > > > NT as an overcall of 1 NT to show the two minors? Are both or neither
> >> >> > >> > > > alertable? Where does ACBL clarify this use of 2 NT?
>
> >> >> > >> > > > Stig Holmquist
>
> >> >> > >> > > I can't absolutely swear it's the current alert procedure since it I
> >> >> > >> > > in PART IX: DEFENSIVE AND COMPETITIVE CALLS states
> >> >> > >> > > "Non-jump unusual notrump bids below 4NT, except those made by a
> >> >> > >> > > passed hand, must be Alerted".
>
> >> >> > >> > > I assume that this includes both 1NT-(2NT) and 1H-(P)-1S-(1NT), both
> >> >> > >> > > of which I'd think should be alerted if they're not unusual no-trump.
>
> >> >> > >> > The second one must be alerted if it _is_ an unusual NT. The rules you
> >> >> > >> > quoted indicate that the first one should be alerted but at least some
> >> >> > >> > ACBL directors don't seem to think so.
>
> >> >> > >> > --
> >> >> > >> > Will in New Haven- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> >> > >> > - Show quoted text -
>
> >> >> > >> What do you take the normal understanding for 1H-(pass)-1S-(1NT) to be
> >> >> > >> then?
>
> >> >> > >If it isn't alerted, it's a balanced hand and some sort of point count
> >> >> > >range, usually strong. It is likely that there are some fields where
> >> >> > >some sort of takeout for the unbid suits would be more common and I
> >> >> > >play it that way myself but there is an expected meaning, absent an
> >> >> > >alert. I think that the reason no one alerts, and directors don't
> >> >> > >expect you to alert, (1NT) - 2NT is that there isn't any other common
> >> >> > >way to play it. It is a very usual Unusual Notrump.
>
> >> >> > In the last edition of "Goren's New Bridge Complete" Goren states that
> >> >> > in the bidding 1S-2NT it is not unusual, but shows a balanced hand
> >> >> > with 22-24 HCP plus S controls. Thus he treated it as equal to a 2NT
Hey!! I just realized something!!!
You responded to one of Will's posts.
And here I thought you had lumped me and Will (and a few others) in
your unholy association of RGBers.
So congratulations to Will for getting out of shithead status.
I can only hope that someday I will get the same experience.....
Henrysun909
David Stevenson
>On Nov 23, 5:25�pm, Stig Holmquist <stigfjor...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 16:59:08 -0800 (PST), "henrysun...@yahoo.com"
>> You should know by now that I don't engage in discussion, argument or
>> exchange of ideas with shitheads like you, who insist on distortring
>> my name for the purpose of redicule. Doing the same thing over and
>> over again expecting a different outcome is the very definition of
>> stupidity, and you fit the bill.I'm not likely to respond to any
>> question from you before Helll freezes over. Keep making an ass of
>> yourself if it makes you feel good.Only masochists do that. Get it
>> through your narrow �mind that I'll not dignify any question from you
>> or your cohorts wwith a response. Get it?
>Hey!! I just realized something!!!
>
>You responded to one of Will's posts.
>
>And here I thought you had lumped me and Will (and a few others) in
>your unholy association of RGBers.
>
>So congratulations to Will for getting out of shithead status.
>
>I can only hope that someday I will get the same experience.....
Quite fun, these little spats. But do you *have to* quote everything
in-between? Could you not snip a bit, please?
David Stevenson
>Perhaps, but I'm still waiting for you to tell me what (1nt) dbl means
>in your edition of Goren's Bridge Complete.
>
>I'm guessing it isn't takeout.
>
>And if we are going to contract to take 8 tricks in NT, leaving 5 for
>the other side, why would we not want to defend 1ntx down 2?
When I was young we found a nice rubber game at the London School of
Bridge. sometimes cut-in, more often partnership. One thing confused us
until we worked it out: opponents played a double of 1NT as 12 to 15
points, and used to bid - possibly 2NT - with 16 or more.
henry...@yahoo.com
wrote:
> Quite fun, these little spats. But do you *have to* quote everything
> in-between? Could you not snip a bit, please?
>
> --
> David Stevenson Bridge RTFLB Cats Railways
> Liverpool, England, UK Fax: +44 870 055 7697 ICQ: 20039682
> <webjak...@googlemail.com> bluejak on OKB
> Bridgepage:http://blakjak.org/brg_menu.htm
Absolutely.
Henrysun909
Will in New Haven
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 16:59:08 -0800 (PST), "henrysun...@yahoo.com"
>
>
>
>
>
> <henrysun...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >On Nov 23, 12:21 pm, Stig Holmquist <stigfjor...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 11:38:07 -0800 (PST), "henrysun...@yahoo.com"
>
> >> <henrysun...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> >wrote:
> >> >> On Nov 22, 6:43 pm, Stig Holmquist <stigfjor...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> > On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 16:04:10 -0800 (PST), Will in New Haven
>
> >> >> > <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote:
> >> >> > >> On Nov 22, 6:05 pm, Will in New Haven
>
> >> >> > >> <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote:
> >> >> > >> > On Nov 22, 6:01 pm, "Fred." <ghrno-goo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> > >> > > On Nov 22, 12:32 pm, Stig Holmquist <stigfjor...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> > >> > > > The ACBL convention card seems to define the unusual NT as a jump bid
> >> >> > >> > > > the ACBL Encyclopedia specifically mention 2 NT ove 1 NT as unusual.
>
> >> >> > >> > > > thus might be alertable. Does the same rule apply to anybody bidding 2
> >> >> > >> > > > NT as an overcall of 1 NT to show the two minors? Are both or neither
> >> >> > >> > > > alertable? Where does ACBL clarify this use of 2 NT?
>
> >> >> > >> > > > Stig Holmquist
>
> >> >> > >> > > I can't absolutely swear it's the current alert procedure since it I
> >> >> > >> > > in PART IX: DEFENSIVE AND COMPETITIVE CALLS states
> >> >> > >> > > "Non-jump unusual notrump bids below 4NT, except those made by a
> >> >> > >> > > passed hand, must be Alerted".
>
> >> >> > >> > > I assume that this includes both 1NT-(2NT) and 1H-(P)-1S-(1NT), both
> >> >> > >> > > of which I'd think should be alerted if they're not unusual no-trump.
>
> >> >> > >> > The second one must be alerted if it _is_ an unusual NT. The rules you
> >> >> > >> > quoted indicate that the first one should be alerted but at least some
> >> >> > >> > ACBL directors don't seem to think so.
>
> >> >> > >> > --
> >> >> > >> > Will in New Haven- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> >> > >> > - Show quoted text -
>
> >> >> > >> What do you take the normal understanding for 1H-(pass)-1S-(1NT) to be
> >> >> > >> then?
>
> >> >> > >If it isn't alerted, it's a balanced hand and some sort of point count
> >> >> > >range, usually strong. It is likely that there are some fields where
> >> >> > >some sort of takeout for the unbid suits would be more common and I
> >> >> > >play it that way myself but there is an expected meaning, absent an
> >> >> > >alert. I think that the reason no one alerts, and directors don't
> >> >> > >expect you to alert, (1NT) - 2NT is that there isn't any other common
> >> >> > >way to play it. It is a very usual Unusual Notrump.
>
> >> >> > In the last edition of "Goren's New Bridge Complete" Goren states that
> >> >> > in the bidding 1S-2NT it is not unusual, but shows a balanced hand
> >> >> > with 22-24 HCP plus S controls. Thus he treated it as equal to a 2NT
Looking in the mirror again, Mr. Holmquist?
Stig Holmquist
Don't hold your breath waiting for that day, you're ensconced at the
top of my list of scumbags, You would have to prostitute yourself to
gain any respectability. Ill Will from N.H. is next to you and so is
the NT expert Nick F. KWS is not far behind as is the Plumber, the
Drano Man. I've got my ducks lined up in a row ready to shoot them
down.
>
>Henrysun909
henry...@yahoo.com
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 21:28:06 -0800 (PST), "henrysun...@yahoo.com"
>
> >Hey!! I just realized something!!!
>
> >You responded to one of Will's posts.
>
> >And here I thought you had lumped me and Will (and a few others) in
> >your unholy association of RGBers.
>
> >So congratulations to Will for getting out of shithead status.
>
> >I can only hope that someday I will get the same experience.....
>
> Don't hold your breath waiting for that day, you're ensconced at the
> top of my list of scumbags, You would have to prostitute yourself to
> gain any respectability. Ill Will from N.H. is next to you and so is
> the NT expert Nick F. KWS is not far behind as is the Plumber, the
> Drano Man. I've got my ducks lined up in a row ready to shoot them
> down.
>
>
>
> >Henrysun909
Awww, and here I thought that someday I might get least unfavored
poster status and receive an actual response like Will did.
Will, I salute you for escaping Stigwood prison. Perhaps some day I
will join you in your newfound freedom!!
Henrysun909
Will in New Haven
Every double I have ever played was passable. I played Brozell with an
older lady who is now gone. She nearly went THEN when I passed her
double, showed a one-suited hand, when she had JXXXXXX of Hearts and
out. But I had a thirteen-count, including AKX in Hearts and we ran
her suit and then took a couple of other tricks. Dummy asked what the
bid meant and Grace told him and I am sure she would have said it
wasn't passable.
We don't play any escape methods (except when partner is a passed hand
or has passed 1NT and a reopening Double gets back to him), except
running to 2 of a suit is to play. nor do we play "systems on." So
what the opponents play doesn't change the meaning of our calls.
Will in New Haven
If only he could do this with his IQ. Actually, I'm sure he's a
brilliant guy. But he's a total ass when turned loose on UseNet.
dranon
<stigf...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>And here I thought you had lumped me and Will (and a few others) in
>>your unholy association of RGBers.
>>
>>So congratulations to Will for getting out of shithead status.
>>
>>I can only hope that someday I will get the same experience.....
>
>Don't hold your breath waiting for that day, you're ensconced at the
>top of my list of scumbags, You would have to prostitute yourself to
>gain any respectability. Ill Will from N.H. is next to you and so is
>the NT expert Nick F. KWS is not far behind as is the Plumber, the
>Drano Man. I've got my ducks lined up in a row ready to shoot them
>down.
Aw, I've been dropped? I'm so sad.
Will in New Haven
wrote:
Did he really communicate with me? He referred me to a centuries-old
bridge book and made no logical points or arguments. Besides, he says
that I am "next to you" and I am proud of it. He gathers so many
bitter enemies while discussing a game in a pleasant and agreeable
manner. Imagine how many people would hate him if he were a total
asshole.
henry...@yahoo.com
Will,
You mean you aren't rejoicing and singing hallelujah over getting a
response from the great Stig??
I haven't made it to the library yet, but hope to do so by the end of
the week.
then we will see if page 191 has been quoted accurately (it may have
been; even Orttman pulls the right card by mistake, according to
Chthonic) and how goren treats (1nt) dbl.
Henrysun909
Fred.
>
> - Show quoted text -
Sorry. I got carried away with the expression "have their bid", which
I interpreted as not psychic rather than not light. And I acknowledge
that there is a tough choice between coming with 1NT at the 1-level
when they are unlimited and at the 2-level where they are limited but
may not have a fit. It's part of the reason light openings are
effective.
For a while, when we were first playing together, may partner and I
tried, with some success in the immediate position, 1NT as takeout,
limited to about 16 dummy points, the direct cue bid as a stronger
takeout, and double as card showing. We abandoned it largely because
the ACBL charting at the time gave us limited places to play it.
Do you know of any experience with a similar approach in the sandwich
position?
Fred.
Alan Malloy
I think you're the Drano Man. dranon, drano, get it?
--
Cheers,
Alan (San Jose, California, USA)
dranon
Wonderful!
Derek Broughton
>
> I recently played against a pair who alerted EVERY artificial bid,
> even RKCB. It annoyed me, and I thought it gave them an advantage in
> that an artificial bid could never go unnoticed. I asked them to
> stop, no luck (though I don't really speak the language, so maybe they
> didn't understand). I got my revenge when I doubled an artificial 2D
> bid as a lead director. They were outraged. What are you doing! You
> can't double that! It's artificial! We explained all this!
Sometimes you wonder how some people can even manage to play this game.
What sort of complete failure of logic goes into thinking there's ever an
opponent's bid that _can't_ be doubled ("shouldn't be", maybe, but "can't")?
--
derek
David Stevenson
>Do you know of any experience with a similar approach in the sandwich
>position?
I play a direct 1NT overcall as about 4-12, two or three of the unbid
suits, guaranteeing at least one four-card major, and have had great
success with it.
In the sandwich position I play 1NT as about 4-12, 5-4 in the unbid
suits. Since my style is to bid an awful lot with hands of a good
shape, whether with points or not, this means I can describe hands well
over a range. It fits in thus:
(1C) - (1H) Dbl 12+, 4-4 D/H or very strong, any shape
1NT 4-12, 5-4 D/H
2NT 2-10, 5-5 D/H
2H 6-14, 6+ in lower ranking [D], 4 in higher ranking [H]
I feel it is a fair success.
--
David Stevenson Bridge RTFLB Cats Railways
Liverpool, England, UK Fax: +44 870 055 7697 ICQ: 20039682
<webj...@googlemail.com> bluejak on OKB
Bridgepage: http://blakjak.org/brg_menu.htm