xxxx Axxxx x KQx
henry...@yahoo.com
during the BBO vugraph of the CNTC and asked them about eric's hand.
Interestingly both said they would pass 2C, both adding that they were
aware that they could be missing game (or even slam, per Justin).
Sharyn noted that she is a conservative bidder (which is not something
about which I was generally aware).
When pressed between 3c and 2h, both chose 3c. Justin felt that the
hand was strong enough (he claimed around 8 points and 4 clubs were
enough) but, like Eric, he wanted 4 clubs for the raise.
Both commented that they might rebid a chunky 5-card heart suit, but
said words to the effect that ace empty fifth is kinda crappy for that
rebid.
I am pleased that apparently I am not the only one who does not know
how to bid.
Henrysun909
MMB = misogynistic misologic blowhard, the first
Eric Leong
I gave a similar hand to Alvin Roth about 17 years ago.
He said "2H. What's the problem?"
Eric Leong
henry...@yahoo.com
2h would be a 'what's the problem' rebid for Roth because he played
that opener's sequence 1d.2c promised a 3rd bid and thus, like KS,
responder's first responsibility was to show a 5 card major. (I know
that Martin cannot find this in Bridge is a Partnership Game, but I
know it was present in the Roth-Root system notes for the 1967 Bermuda
Bowl and 1968 Olympiad publications, and was also expressed in Bridge
Today articles.)
Look Eric, you claimed that 9 points and 3 clubs were too weak and too
short for a raise to 3c. Nick showed that you were, hopefully
unintentionally, misrepresenting Hardy's position, and most everyone
else who commented in the other thread felt that Axxxx was too weak
and too short for a rebid of 2h.
If you want to think that 2h is somehow a better, less distorted, more
descriptive rebid by responder than 2h, then you just go one thinking
that. Justin and Sharyn would think you are misguided, as would
everyone else who disagreed with you.
And as would I.
Eric Leong
>
> - Show quoted text -
Well it is certainly news to me that a third bid is promised by opener
after the auction: 1D - 1H; 2C - 2H; ?
And Roth never said that to me.
In Standard American, 2C could be on as much as a 17 count or opener
could be very distributional so you strive to keep the bidding live
since game still might be possible.
Bidding 3C could result in partner bidding an underpowered 3NT.
Bidding 2H could result in a reasonable contract if partner has two
hearts or more.
Even if partner has a stiff heart, 2H can be a playable contract by
ruffing diamonds in your hand.
Sure 2H passed out in a 5-1 fit could be inferior to playing in a 4-3
club fit.
But game does pay a bonus since I last looked.
Eric Leong
henry...@yahoo.com
But game does pay a bonus since I last looked.
Eric Leong
************
Is there really a hand that can be constructed where rebidding 2h will
get to a game that 3c will not also reach?
"I highly doubt that" - Wil Smith, I, Robot
Henrysun, TFMMB (the first misogynistic misologic blowhard)
Will in New Haven
> On Jun 1, 8:40 am, Eric Leong <ewleong...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> But game does pay a bonus since I last looked.
>
> Eric Leong
>
> ************
>
> Is there really a hand that can be constructed where rebidding 2h will
> get to a game that 3c will not also reach?
>
> "I highly doubt that" - Wil Smith, I, Robot
I don't think bidding 3C will get you to 4H opposite
A-QX-AXXXX-AJXXX but 2H sure will. Is it always down? No. But it's a
lousy contract.
--
Will in New Haven
henry...@yahoo.com
wrote:
>
> - Show quoted text -
Well, perhaps I should have specified, no GOOD game rofl.
Henrysun909, TFMMB
Eric Leong
>
> > On Jun 1, 8:40 am, Eric Leong <ewleong...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > But game does pay a bonus since I last looked.
>
> > Eric Leong
>
> > ************
>
> > Is there really a hand that can be constructed where rebidding 2h will
> > get to a game that 3c will not also reach?
>
> > "I highly doubt that" - Wil Smith, I, Robot
>
> I don't think bidding 3C will get you to 4H opposite
> A-QX-AXXXX-AJXXX but 2H sure will. Is it always down? No. But it's a
> lousy contract.
>
> --
> Will in New Haven
I don't think the hand given is a 4H bid over 2H but I would accept 3H
which would be passed and has reasonable chances of making.
Still if I am to be charged with being in 4H with the hand given then
I think I should be given credit for keeping the bidding open and
reaching an excellent 4H countract with either:
S x H KQx D Axxxx C AJxx
S x H KQx D Axxx C AJxxx
both of which are weaker in hcp and produce game that you would
certainly want to be there.
Please note in the last example you wouldn't mind being in 6H.
Eric Leong
>
>
>
> > Henrysun, TFMMB (the first misogynistic misologic blowhard)- Hide quoted text -
Eric Leong
Raising to 3C with routinely get you to a lousy 3NT when partner has a
maximum. For example:
S Kx S xxxx
H Kx H Axxxx
D KJxxx D x
C Axxx C KQx
If you rebid 2H, partner will almost certainly pass.
Eric Leong
henry...@yahoo.com
Well Eric, in my own simple minded way of thinking, either opener can
raise to 2h right away with a singleton spade and the KQx of hearts
or, if one feels that is too conservative an evaluation of the hand
(reasonable, to be sure), one can rebid 2c and then raise 2h to 3h or
pull 3c to 3h, showing a 3-card raise with a hand roughly in the
strong 1nt range.
Since I dislike opening 1d with 4=5 majors, on your second hand I am
forced to underbid somewhat by raising to 2h right away, or overbid by
rather a lot by reversing into 2d and then raising to 3h. Since the
underbid is less a distortion than the overbid, I would probably
choose that and trust responder, with a 5-card suit and the KQx of
clubs, to make a game try. I would accept said game try by bidding
3d, to show length, or 3s, to show shortness, per partnership
agreement.
In either case, it is doubful that I would get to slam, but in both of
your hands, I would certainly get to game.
Henrysun909, TFMMB
henry...@yahoo.com
And the reason I did not choose to make a 1nt rebid, showing a
balanced minimum lacking 3 hearts unless 4333 was?
I would expect that after 1d 1h 1nt p, our partnership would rest in
the right place.
But maybe, just maybe, if you think 2h is catering to an opener who
forgot to raise with 3 hearts or who forgot to rebid 1nt with a mostly
balanced hand in range, then by all means, you should probably
continue to rebid 2h. No sense assuming that opener has bid his hand
correctly.
Henrysun909, TFMMB
Eric Leong
> On Jun 2, 12:37 pm, Eric Leong <ewleong...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jun 1, 12:04 pm, henrysun...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> > > On Jun 1, 8:40 am, Eric Leong <ewleong...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > But game does pay a bonus since I last looked.
>
> > > Eric Leong
>
> > > ************
>
> > > Is there really a hand that can be constructed where rebidding 2h will
> > > get to a game that 3c will not also reach?
>
> > > "I highly doubt that" - Wil Smith, I, Robot
>
> > > Henrysun, TFMMB (the first misogynistic misologic blowhard)
>
> > Raising to 3C with routinely get you to a lousy 3NT when partner has a
> > maximum. For example:
>
> > S Kx S xxxx
> > H Kx H Axxxx
> > D KJxxx D x
> > C Axxx C KQx
>
> > If you rebid 2H, partner will almost certainly pass.
>
> > Eric Leong
>
> And the reason I did not choose to make a 1nt rebid, showing a
> balanced minimum lacking 3 hearts unless 4333 was?
Okay, if it makes you happier that opener denies a 2=2=5=4 shape with
his 2C bid then make the hands:
S Axx S xxxx
H K H Axxxx
D Kxxxx D x
C Axxx C KQx
S AKx S xxxx
H x H Axxxx
D Qxxxx D x
C AJxx C KQx
S Axx S xxxx
H x H Axxxx
D AJxxx D x
C AJxx C KQx
2H has a play. If you raise to 3C partner is going to bid to a lousy
3NT.
Eric Leong
>
> I would expect that after 1d 1h 1nt p, our partnership would rest in
> the right place.
>
> But maybe, just maybe, if you think 2h is catering to an opener who
> forgot to raise with 3 hearts or who forgot to rebid 1nt with a mostly
> balanced hand in range, then by all means, you should probably
> continue to rebid 2h. No sense assuming that opener has bid his hand
> correctly.
>
> Henrysun909, TFMMB-
Eric Leong
Certainly, you aren't getting to game if you pass 2C.
A raise to 2H systemically promises four but if you choose to raise to
2H I would not mind.
But not bidding 2H is not a systemic mistake. Further, responder is
not going to make a game try over 2H.
However, after a 2H bid from responder your chances of getting to 4H
are much brighter.
Eric Leong
henry...@yahoo.com
EL: Certainly, you aren't getting to game if you pass 2C.
TFMMB: Obviously. Note that it was Sharyn and Justin who chose to
pass 2c, both well aware that they might be missing game. I did not
pass and did not support a pass of 2c, so this argument as it applies
to my bidding is specious and irrelevant.
EL A raise to 2H systemically promises four but if you choose to
raise to
2H I would not mind. But not bidding 2H is not a systemic mistake.
TFMMB: If the 2h raise systemically promises 4, well that's a burden
I can't overcome. I think Miles, Rubens, and Lawrence have all more
than adequately demonstrated the systemic gains after appropriate 3-
card raises (and that, for example, the old KS style where a raise
promised 4 was one of the few areas where I disagreed with Edgar).
Needless to say, this does not apply when a 2c rebid is Cole, but I
only mention that for the sake of completeness.
EL: Further, responder isnot going to make a game try over 2H.
TFMMB: some responders may choose not to make a game try over 2h, but
I would not be one of them. Since as little as
xx
Kxxx
xx
Axxxx
is enough to give game a play, I consider it very conservative not to
make a try. Pretty much any hand with club length and non-spade
length that is a real opening bid is going to give you a shot at
game. Give opener the worst possible hand:
QJx
Jxx
Ax
Axxxx
And you won't be in game. 3H is obviously not a secure contract by
any means, but if that is the downside of looking for a game which
could be cold if opener has
xx
KQx
xxx
AJxxx
then I'll gladly pay that cost.
Henrysun909, TFMMB
henry...@yahoo.com
S Axx S xxxx
H K H Axxxx
D Kxxxx D x
C Axxx C KQx
S AKx S xxxx
H x H Axxxx
D Qxxxx D x
C AJxx C KQx
S Axx S xxxx
H x H Axxxx
D AJxxx D x
C AJxx C KQx
***********
Well Eric, I suppose you are right and opener might barge into 3nt
with no obvious source of tricks opposite his main suit and no fit for
responder's major.
But if it makes you happy, how much better is game if the hands are:
S Axx S Qxx
H K H Axxxx
D Kxxxx D x
C Axxx C KQxx
S AKx S Qxx
H x H Axxxx
D Qxxxx D x
C AJxx C KQxx
S Axx S Qxx
H x H Axxxx
D AJxxx D x
C AJxx C KQxx
The first pair of hands have 7 top tricks. Where are tricks 8 AND 9
coming from?
The second pair of hands have 8 top tricks. Where is the 9th coming
from?
The third pair of hands have 7 top tricks. Where are the 8th AND 9th
tricks coming from?
Note that I've given responder a fitting KQ of clubs, a fast winner in
the ace of hearts, and help in spades opposite opener's stopper.
Surely this is an indisputable raise to 3c, even by your misreading of
Hardy's standards.
And opposite this sound raise to 3c, 3nt has play that varies from
poor to awful.
Perhaps, then, the fact that 3nt is such a poor contract says more
about how borderline the 3nt rebid is by opener than how pushy a raise
to 3c with
xxxx
Axxxx
x
KQx
is,
Henrysun909, TFMMB
Eric Leong
The auction is:
1D 1H
2H ?
holding S xxxx H Axxxx D x C KQx
Do you invite?
Each of your examples is not remotely close to a 1D opener.
Eric Leong
Eric Leong
Well if responder chose to sit for 3NT, 3NT is less horrible after 3C
in these examples then on:
S xxxx H Axxxx D x C KQx.
Still you just strengthened my argument that 2H is a better rebid than
3C since you are less likely to end up in a hopeless 3NT.
Eric Leong
CBFalconer
>
... snip ...
>
> The auction is:
> 1D 1H
> 2H ?
> holding S xxxx H Axxxx D x C KQx
>
> Do you invite?
Since it makes 4H opposite an ideal opener, the answer is yes.
Another way to look at it is that it contains 9 HCP and 2
distributional points, for 11, so opener needs only 15 for a
suitable game contract.
--
[mail]: Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
[page]: <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>
Try the download section.
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
Eric Leong
> Eric Leong wrote:
>
> ... snip ...
>
> > The auction is:
> > 1D 1H
> > 2H ?
> > holding S xxxx H Axxxx D x C KQx
>
> > Do you invite?
>
> Since it makes 4H opposite an ideal opener, the answer is yes.
> Another way to look at it is that it contains 9 HCP and 2
> distributional points, for 11, so opener needs only 15 for a
> suitable game contract.
One might think holding a stiff in partner's suit is not worth two
distributional points.
Eric Leong
CBFalconer
> CBFalconer <cbfalco...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Eric Leong wrote:
>>
>> ... snip ...
>>
>>> The auction is:
>>> 1D 1H
>>> 2H ?
>>> holding S xxxx H Axxxx D x C KQx
>>>
>>> Do you invite?
>>
>> Since it makes 4H opposite an ideal opener, the answer is yes.
>> Another way to look at it is that it contains 9 HCP and 2
>> distributional points, for 11, so opener needs only 15 for a
>> suitable game contract.
>
> One might think holding a stiff in partner's suit is not worth
> two distributional points.
To the contrary, it is an indication that such things as
cross-ruffs are likely to work nicely. It is greatly preferable,
for example, to a doubleton. For example with a club lead partners
hand of:
A Kxxx Axxxx Jxx
will probably wrap 4H. Other leads may take more care. You won't
get there, but so what?
henry...@yahoo.com
Since it seems clear that having a discussion with someone who doesn't
bother to read what I have posted, perhaps I will be excused for
quoting myself:
HS: Well Eric, in my own simple minded way of thinking, either opener
can
raise to 2h right away with a singleton spade and the KQx of hearts
or, if one feels that is too conservative an evaluation of the hand
(reasonable, to be sure), one can rebid 2c and then raise 2h to 3h or
pull 3c to 3h, showing a 3-card raise with a hand roughly in the
strong 1nt range.
Since I dislike opening 1d with 4=5 majors, on your second hand I am
forced to underbid somewhat by raising to 2h right away, or overbid by
rather a lot by reversing into 2d and then raising to 3h. Since the
underbid is less a distortion than the overbid, I would probably
choose that and trust responder, with a 5-card suit and the KQx of
clubs, to make a game try. I would accept said game try by bidding
3d, to show length, or 3s, to show shortness, per partnership
agreement.
**********
Note that in the context of what I actually wrote, not what Eric
either mistakenly thinks I wrote or simply just ignored, there are two
auctions under discussion.
In the first, opener bids 1d.2c.3h to show a 3-card heart raise in the
strong 1nt range of strength. No danger of missing 4h then.
In the second, opener bids 1c.2h and trusts responder to make a move
with fitting club cards and the Ace fifth of hearts.
In Eric's new, third auction, the 2h raise by opener is somewhat more
narrowly limited than the same auction after a 1c opening bid. Why?
Because when opener has a 3-card, 2-and-a-half raise to 2h, the 1d
opening bid offers him two temporizing rebids, 1s and 2c. 1s might be
the prefered rebid with
AKx
KQx
Kxxxxx
x
as it was in an old MSC problem. (Virtually all who rebid 1s were
hoping to be able to make an unforced, hence strength showing 2h rebid
or, if forced, would rebid 3h to show this hand.) Opener could also
rebid 2c with
x
KQx
Kxxxxx
AKx
with the same effect.
After a 1c opening bid, opener only has 1 temporizing rebid that is
not a reverse. Hence, with
AKx
KQx
x
Kxxxxx
opener might very well choose to rebid 1s and hope to make the same
unforced strength showing preference to hearts.
But with
x
KQx
AKx
Kxxxxx
a 2d rebid is quite dangerous, in spite of the reasonable heart fit,
because if responder has 4 hearts and a weak misfitting hand in clubs
- perhaps
KJxx
Jxxx
Jxxx
x
then the odds of finding the wrong partial and going down a lot is
quite real. Therefore, some will have to choose to make an underbid
of 2h or an underbid of 2c; only fairly aggressive bidders will rebid
2d and, in effect, hope for the sequence 1c 1h; 2d 2h; 3h ?
Now, hopefully that is clear enough for even Eric to understand.
Having had my post thoroughly misrepresented by Eric, I now wonder if
his misrepresentation of Hardy was not unintentional but deliberate,
i.e, he knew what Hardy said but distorted it anyway.
One would think that someone with Eric's long history at this game
would not have so to stoop.
Henrysun, TFMMB
henry...@yahoo.com
Not at all.
I think it is highly debatable whether an opener with no fit for
hearts, a poor diamond suit, and only 4 tricks in clubs should bid 3nt
at all.
If a maximum type raise to 3c gets to such crappy games, why bid the
games at all?
So in fact, raising to 3c gets you to the right partial - 3c - instead
of the wrong partial - 2h.
Surely even you can see that Eric.
Henrysun909
Justin Lall
>
> - Show quoted text -
Agree, I would generally expect 14 counts to be passing unless they
were very good 14 counts.
Given that your range for the 2C rebid is something like a good 11 to
a bad 18 and your range on shapes is from 5422(least shapely) to
anything (most shapely), a 5-4 14 count with a stiff in partner's suit
is surely much closer to a minimum than a maximum. Another way to look
at it is that partner has to raise with many 9 counts, and possibly
less (xxx Axxxx x KJxx etc) in order to keep the auction open for a
partner with a very wide range, bidding game with random 14's will
just get you too high too often.
I really dislike 2H since you will just get to a horrible partscore
too often. If you are shooting for the game bonus I think 3C is much
better since it keeps the auction open and always at least gets you to
a playable spot if partner passes it.
--
Justin Lall
Eric Leong
What did I stoop to?
You gave as examples for opener as after the bidding:
1D 1H
2H ?
Why you would make a game try if opener had .....
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
TFMMB: some responders may choose not to make a game try over 2h,
but
I would not be one of them. Since as little as
xx
Kxxx
xx
Axxxx
is enough to give game a play, I consider it very conservative not to
make a try. Pretty much any hand with club length and non-spade
length that is a real opening bid is going to give you a shot at
game. Give opener the worst possible hand:
QJx
Jxx
Ax
Axxxx
And you won't be in game. 3H is obviously not a secure contract by
any means, but if that is the downside of looking for a game which
could be cold if opener has
xx
KQx
xxx
AJxxx
then I'll gladly pay that cost.
Henrysun909, TFMMB
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One would think you are not exactly on the same planet.
Eric Leong
Eric Leong
It is nice to give an example where there is no diamond wastage after
your stiff.
But one would think in the suit your partner opens that there is more
likely going to be some wastage opposite the stiff then not. Give
partner something like: S Qxx H KQxx D AQJx C xx for his 2H raise
and now partner would probably raise to an inferior 4H after an
invititation.
Eric Leong
Eric Leong
There are two issues.
1. Do you keep the bidding open?
2. If you keep the bidding open, what do you bid?
The answer to the first question is yes. If in Standard American
opener could be as strong as a bad 18 count, you bend over backwards
not to pass the hand out in 2C. Partner could either have a very
distributional two suited hand or a good hand with three hearts that
is too good for a 2H raise. I have also seen expert players who would
open 1D with four diamonds and five clubs with say a 16 or 17 count
because of rebid problems after one of a major. My understanding from
Henry in a previous post is he asked you what do you bid and you
passed 2C.
I think the answer to the second question is you bid 2H. You dislike
bidding 2H because "it will get you to a horrible part score two
often." But if partner has two hearts you are much better off in a
5-2 heart fit at the two level than a 4-3 fit at the three level.
Certainly, at pairs, you want to be in 2H with a 5-2 fit rather than
2C in a 4-3 fit. In addition, you risk getting to an under powered 3NT
if your partner bids 3NT with a "good 14". Bidding 2H does not carry
that risk. I have conceded that sometimes partner might have a stiff
for you. However, I have shown in previous posts how 2H just might be
able to slip home from diamond ruffs in your hand. Also, note being in
2H going down a trick in a 5-1 heart fit may be even better than being
in 3C going down two tricks at the three level.
Eric Leong
henry...@yahoo.com
What did I stoop to?
You gave as examples for opener as after the bidding:
1D 1H
2H ?
*************
I hereby coin the new bridge verb, 'to pro-Leong,' which is to extend
a thread through deliberate stupidity.
Is it really so hard to understand that 1d 1h 2h is a more narrowly
defined raise than 1c 1h 2h because there are twice as many
temporizing bids available to opener in the former sequence than the
latter?
Is it really so hard to understand that because 1d 1h 2s is a more
narrowly defined raise than 1c 1h 2h, some hands that might bid on
after the latter (because it is less narrowly defined) might pass
after the former (because it is more narrowly defined)?
Is it really so hard to understand that with 4=5=1=3 shape after a 1c
opening bid, it is not outside the realm of possibility that opener
doesn't have 3 spades and hence cannot make a temporizing bid, and
hence responder might have to take a more aggressive view than over 1d
1h 2s?
(I thought I might add another paragraph of the "is it really so hard
to understand" type in which I articulated the difference between 1d
1s 2s and 1c 1s 2s, but I didn't want to disable Eric's ability to
comprehend by introducing yet another set of sequences, unrelated to
the sequence at hand. Apparently, when things get beyond the binary
1's and 2's, disorientation sets in.)
C'mon Eric, you can't really be that dense, can you?
Henrysun909, TFMMV
Eric Leong
Henry, am I dealing with an idiot?
After the auction,
1D 1H
2H ?
You gave two examples for opener's 1D opener on:
QJx
Jxx
Ax
Axxxx
and
xx
KQx
xxx
AJxxx
to justify a game try on S xxxx H Axxxx D x C KQx.
I keep asking you this question. You don't answer and snip out my
comments.
Eric Leong
henry...@yahoo.com
Yes, you are Eric. (To see who it is, just take a look in the
mirror.)
Waaaay back when, when this alleged discussion began, we had the
following exchange:
EL:
I don't think the hand given is a 4H bid over 2H but I would accept 3H
which would be passed and has reasonable chances of making.
Still if I am to be charged with being in 4H with the hand given then
I think I should be given credit for keeping the bidding open and
reaching an excellent 4H countract with either:
S x H KQx D Axxxx C AJxx
S x H KQx D Axxx C AJxxx
both of which are weaker in hcp and produce game that you would
certainly want to be there.
Please note in the last example you wouldn't mind being in 6H.
Eric Leong
To which I responded:
Well Eric, in my own simple minded way of thinking, either opener can
raise to 2h right away with a singleton spade and the KQx of hearts
or, if one feels that is too conservative an evaluation of the hand
(reasonable, to be sure), one can rebid 2c and then raise 2h to 3h or
pull 3c to 3h, showing a 3-card raise with a hand roughly in the
strong 1nt range.
Since I dislike opening 1d with 4=5 majors, on your second hand I am
forced to underbid somewhat by raising to 2h right away, or overbid by
rather a lot by reversing into 2d and then raising to 3h. Since the
underbid is less a distortion than the overbid, I would probably
choose that and trust responder, with a 5-card suit and the KQx of
clubs, to make a game try. I would accept said game try by bidding
3d, to show length, or 3s, to show shortness, per partnership
agreement.
*************
Now, it is important, contextually, to understand that my response was
based on your two example hands. (I thought I'd made that clear when
I wrote "Since I dislike opening 1d with 4=5 majors, ON YOUR SECOND
HAND I am forced to underbid somewhat by raising to 2h right away, or
overbid by rather a lot by reversing into 2d and then raising to 3h,"
but apparently I did not make proper allowance for your understanding
of your own post. Apologies, and hopefully I can do better next
time.)
Therefore, the context of my post was first, that after opening 1d, I
would rebid 2c and convert 3c to 3h, showing approximately your first
hand: 14-16 ish hcps, 3 card heart support.
I conceded that since I dislike opening 1d when 4=5 in the minors,
YOUR SECOND HAND cannot be solved in this same fashion because the
only temporizing bid available is a reverse, which is a substantial
overbid. Therefore, the main choice is to raise to 2h which shows a
somewhat larger range than the 1d 1h 2h sequence.
So by asking whether I would take another call after 1d 1h 2s, you
were creating a 3rd sequence (since 1d 1h 2h is not the same as 1c 1h
2h or 1d 1h 2c 3c 3h). Would I pass a raise to 2h with
xxxx
Axxxx
x
KQx
after 1d 1h 2h? I might: the 5th heart is good, but there is no
guarantee that my clubs are working opposite opener's length, AND MOST
IMPORTANT THE 3-CARD 14-16 POINT RAISE IS VERY UNLIKELY.
Still, who could blame opener for raising to 2h with
x
Kxxx
KJxxx
Axx
and one just might run into a 2-2 heart break and win 5 hearts, 2
spade ruffs, and 3 clubs, let along a possible diamond trick. Even
with a balanced subminimum (to my non-Precision standards) like
xx
Kxxx
KJxx
Axx
offers some (poor) chance for game: 5 hearts, 3 clubs, a spade ruff,
and a diamond trick.
So passing is by far not the 100% clear call you seem to imply that it
is.
So in conclusion Eric, yes you are dealing with an idiot.
Regrettably, you have to deal with him 24/7 for the rest of your
natural life.
Henrysun, TFMMB
Eric Leong
>
> - Show quoted text -
On Jun 3, 9:02 am, Eric Leong <ewleong...@hotmail.com> wrote:
HENRY, I ASKED A SIMPLE QUESTION. AGAIN I ASKED YOU ABOUT YOU COMMENT
BELOW.
AGAIN YOU DON'T ANSWER THE QUESTION. And then you snip out my reply.
I have been SUNNED again.
Eric
>
> Henry, am I dealing with an idiot?
>
> After the auction,
>
> 1D 1H
> 2H ?
>
> You gave two examples for opener's 1D opener on:
>
> QJx
> Jxx
> Ax
> Axxxx
>
> and
>
> xx
> KQx
> xxx
> AJxxx
>
> to justify a game try on S xxxx H Axxxx D x C KQx.
>
> I keep asking you this question. You don't answer and snip out my
> comments.
>
> Eric Leong-
kingfish
> I "ran" into Sharyn Reus (Canadian internationalist) and Justin Lall
> during the BBO vugraph of the CNTC and asked them about eric's hand.
>
> Interestingly both said they would pass 2C, both adding that they were
> aware that they could be missing game (or even slam, per Justin).
> Sharyn noted that she is a conservative bidder (which is not something
> about which I was generally aware).
>
> When pressed between 3c and 2h, both chose 3c. Justin felt that the
> hand was strong enough (he claimed around 8 points and 4 clubs were
> enough) but, like Eric, he wanted 4 clubs for the raise.
>
> Both commented that they might rebid a chunky 5-card heart suit, but
> said words to the effect that ace empty fifth is kinda crappy for that
> rebid.
>
> I am pleased that apparently I am not the only one who does not know
> how to bid.
>
> Henrysun909
> MMB = misogynistic misologic blowhard, the first
***
3C.
As you would expect, the partnership agreements (bidding style) is
what is important to this discussion. If you are playing a "Roth"
style re-bid of 2C, it promises extra strength and a 3rd call. After
that, 2H would then merely show a 5-card suit, not promising a great
suit. If you are playing some 2/1 version, where 2C might show a crap
11 point opening, and possibly 4-5 in the minors, any further bid
risks life and limb. You must first define the partnership style
before a judgment can be made about further action.
My style would be to re-bid 2H and drive to some game.
Sandy Barnes
***
henry...@yahoo.com
So Eric, in which part of this reply did I not address your specific
question on whether I would make a game try with xxxx Axxxx x KQx:
HS:
xxxx
Axxxx
x
KQx
x
Kxxx
KJxxx
Axx
xx
Kxxx
KJxx
Axx
*************
Did you perhaps think that "I might" and "by far not the 100% clear
call you seem to imply that it is" suggest that I am passing 2h?
Indeed I might. I probably wouldn't (unless playing against you. I'd
figure that I'd be a favorite to win without being overly aggressive
anyway) but then I'm all for going after that game bonus you mentioned
in a different thread.
Hopefully, you won't be pro-Leonging this thread any longer.
Henrysun909, TFMMB
PS: Apologies, again, for not expressing myself in a language any 1st
grader could understand. I had thought, apparently wrongly, that by
starting a discussion with the note "OPPOSITE YOUR SECOND HAND" the
1=3=4=5 hand, I was attempting to show why on the sequence 1c 1h 2s
this hand is (to me) an obvious game try and was constructing hands to
show why on the sequence generated BY YOUR SECOND HAND the example
hand is a clear cut game try.
Next time I'll try to write it out in one syllable words easily
understood by most kindergarteners.
Charles Brenner
That's a false dichotomy. You're arguing in effect that (1) game
prospects are worthwhile, hence one should bid, hence (2) however bad
the bidding choices one must choose among them.
Granting for the sake of argument your judgment (1), accepting the 2-
step reasoning precludes the (lively) possibility that while the
luckier choice between 2H or 3C on average works better than pass,
nonetheless pass is on average better than either of them
individually.
Charles
Eric Leong
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
> > 1D 1H
> > 2H ?
> > *************
> > Henrysun909, TFMMV
Eric
> After the auction,
> 1D 1H
> 2H ?
> QJx
> Jxx
> Ax
> Axxxx
> and
> xx
> KQx
> xxx
> AJxxx
> Eric Leong-
Henry,
Again, you don't answer my one question and you just snip out the
question each time.
I just don't have any more intelligence to squander on you. I give up.
You must be suffering from some incurable disease.
I forgive you just like I forgive you for not paying off your $20 bet
you offered me on rec.games.bridge which you conceded I won.
Eric Leong
Eric Leong
If you want to give up that partner could have a 15 to a bad 18 count
or a distributional minor two suited hand and a game and even a slam
mighted be missed and that sometimes 2H isn't a bad contract and could
be a better contract than passing 2C then that is your perogative. But
you have not supported "nonetheless pass is on average better than
either of them individually".
Eric Leong
Eric Leong
OldPalooka
>
> - Show quoted text -
One would think that playing the right type of game tries would allow
partner to judge whether a singleton is good or bad. Even playing
simple long/help suit tries can accomplish this, try with 2S, partner
can counter try with 3C [singleton diamond good] or 2NT, 3D, or 3H
where you would quit. If you know what you are doing, will you make 4
hearts about as often than you go set in 3 or 4 [make appropriate
adjustments for IMPs, weak/strong field matchpoints]? Well, if a
singleton diamond is bad, your hand is a marginal game try, and if
good better than a game try, so yes, I expect to make long run dough
by trying for game.
== Bill Shutts
OldPalooka
> In addition, you risk getting to an under powered 3NT
> if your partner bids 3NT with a "good 14". Bidding 2H does not carry
> that risk.
Are you playing rubber or playing for pay where you might not trust
your CHO? If partner has this "good 14" why did he not open 1NT in
the first place since he knows how awkward this sequence is? Or
perhaps he is a different sort of palooka that does not understand the
range problem associated with this auction in particular.
I have conceded that sometimes partner might have a stiff
> for you. However, I have shown in previous posts how 2H just might be
> able to slip home from diamond ruffs in your hand.
But won't your palooka make 3 or 4 clubs on a simple cross ruff?
After all, he will have some aces and kings for entries to ruff
diamonds.
Also, note being in
> 2H going down a trick in a 5-1 heart fit may be even better than being
> in 3C going down two tricks at the three level.
Admittedly this is possible, but I will lay you 6 to 5 against and
only feel a little guilty.
But you have once again demonstrated something pretty fundamental:
world class partnerships should play this auction like K-S, or as Cole
>
> Eric Leong- Hide quoted text -
>
== Bill Shutts
Eric Leong
> [snip]
>
> > In addition, you risk getting to an under powered 3NT
> > if your partner bids 3NT with a "good 14". Bidding 2H does not carry
> > that risk.
>
> Are you playing rubber or playing for pay where you might not trust
> your CHO? If partner has this "good 14" why did he not open 1NT in
> the first place since he knows how awkward this sequence is? Or
> perhaps he is a different sort of palooka that does not understand the
> range problem associated with this auction in particular.
I don't open 14 counts with 1NT playing 15-17 notrumps.
I would bid 2H anytime in this sequence playing rubber bridge or imps
for money at significant stakes.
>
> I have conceded that sometimes partner might have a stiff
>
> > for you. However, I have shown in previous posts how 2H just might be
> > able to slip home from diamond ruffs in your hand.
>
> But won't your palooka make 3 or 4 clubs on a simple cross ruff?
> After all, he will have some aces and kings for entries to ruff
> diamonds.
Perhaps, if your partner doesn't bid an inferior 3NT and your
opponents don't lead a trump.
Also, I might be able to make 3H if partner has a doubleton trump and
hearts split 3-3.
Eric Leong
StevieTee
>
> > > Henry, am I dealing with an idiot?
> > >
> > >
> > > I keep asking you this question. You don't answer and snip out my
> > > comments.
> > >
> > > Eric Leong
>
> > Yes, you are Eric. (To see who it is, just take a look in the
> > mirror.)
> >
> >
> > So in conclusion Eric, yes you are dealing with an idiot.
> > Regrettably, you have to deal with him 24/7 for the rest of your
> > natural life.
> >
> > Henrysun, TFMMB
> > >
> > > a thread through deliberate stupidity.
> > >
> > >
> > > C'mon Eric, you can't really be that dense, can you?
> > >
> > > Henrysun909, TFMMV
>
> HENRY, I ASKED A SIMPLE QUESTION. AGAIN I ASKED YOU ABOUT YOU COMMENT
> BELOW.
> AGAIN YOU DON'T ANSWER THE QUESTION. And then you snip out my reply.
>
> I have been SUNNED again.
>
> Eric
Now, now, boys, can't we all just play nicely together here on R.G.B.?
We obviously have different views on the "best" bid to make in this
situation; however, there's no "right" answer, and it doesn't sound
like you're convincing one another.
Me, I solve this problem by bidding randomly, so that partner never
has ANY idea what I am doing....
LOL - Steve Sun
Bob Lipton
Eh? A world class partnership should play this auctiont he way they
agree to play it. I have no more intelligent criticism to offer on a
world class partnership's auction than you do, and their auctions vary
over the map. However, they get to the right contract more than you and
I using their own methods.
Bob
Charles Brenner
You are correct. I only attacked your logic, not your conclusion. I
didn't claim that "pass is better than either of them individually",
but only pointed out that your line of reasoning overlooks the
possibility.
Charles
Sid
: I hereby coin the new bridge verb, 'to pro-Leong,' which is to extend
: a thread through deliberate stupidity.
This post was more stupid. Take a break for 3 months and let Eric
contribute, as he always did, unimpeded by your vile attacks.
Sid
Sid
: Yes, you are Eric. (To see who it is, just take a look in the
: mirror.)
Totally childish and idiotic. This is a bridge group.
Sid
Justin Lall
>
> - Show quoted text -
Eric,
I basically agree with what Charles said. My basic theory (obviously I
cannot prove it, that's why bridge is awesome) is that:
1) If you compare pass to 3C, pass will gain enough swings from
avoiding bad games/avoiding bad 3C contracts and making 2C that it
will make up for the times when 3C gets you to a good game.
2) If you compare pass to 2H, pass will gain enough swings from
avoiding bad 2H contracts (and those can be really bad) that it will
make up for the times when bidding 2H gets you to a good game.
Sure it is the conservative route, but imo it will be the long term
winner (again, cannot prove that! just my judgment).
If there was a bid I could make that combined the virtues of 2H and 3C
(ie, not getting me to many bad games, and also not getting me to a
ridiculous partial), I would happily make it. Usually on this auction
that is a false preference with a doubleton diamond, but unfortunately
I was dealt a singleton diamond this time :)
--
Justin Lall
dranon
Perhaps, but there is one reason to bid 2H that has been overlooked.
How can you expect to improve your declarer play if you don't? This
is a more serious comment than I think you are thinking at this
moment.
OldPalooka
> On Tue, 3 Jun 2008 08:46:34 -0700 (PDT), henrysun...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> : I hereby coin the new bridge verb, 'to pro-Leong,' which is to extend
> : a thread through deliberate stupidity.
>
> This post was more stupid. Take a break for 3 months and let Eric
> contribute, as he always did, unimpeded by your vile attacks.
>
> Sid
Oh come now Sid, we all know Eric can take it personally when we
question his decisions. He has been known to use an uncharitable
phrase [calling me for example a "mental midget" when we were arguing
-- in the Aristotelian sense from my side of course, no rancor, just
clash of fact and logic :) -- over a hand evaluation that differed by
perhaps a quarter or half a point]. He has been observed to turn more
truculent while he is entrenching his position deeper and deeper
against all comers. I have even noticed that he will occasionally
sidestep or perhaps [inadvertently I expect despite my suspicions]
obfuscate an argument to the contrary. Rarely have I seen a "you may
be right" except when accompanied by a reference to "buying a lottery
ticket".
I don't think these are grossly exaggerated observations. That Henry
has coined a phrase that summarizes the previous paragraph hardly
qualifies as vile or vicious, there is no real intent to villify or
hurt. And it is anything but stupid, perhaps a tiny bit wicked if you
like.
Nothing any of us might write will impede him. Nor would we want to.
It would spoil a good bit of our fun. And everything else is
transient.
== Bill Shutts
OldPalooka
>
> - Show quoted text -
Because I am going to improve my partner's declarer play by bidding
3C? = Bill Shutts
CBFalconer
> OldPalooka <ashut...@san.rr.com> wrote:
>> [snip]
>>
>>> In addition, you risk getting to an under powered 3NT
>>> if your partner bids 3NT with a "good 14". Bidding 2H does not
>>> carry that risk.
>>
>> Are you playing rubber or playing for pay where you might not
>> trust your CHO? If partner has this "good 14" why did he not
>> open 1NT in the first place since he knows how awkward this
>> sequence is? Or perhaps he is a different sort of palooka that
>> does not understand the range problem associated with this
> auction in particular.
>
> I don't open 14 counts with 1NT playing 15-17 notrumps.
> I would bid 2H anytime in this sequence playing rubber bridge or
> imps for money at significant stakes.
And why should opener have a NT distribution? He hasn't suggested
anything of the sort. As I recall the auction has gone:
1D 1H 2H
and the question is whether or not to make a game try.
CBFalconer
> CBFalconer <cbfalco...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Eric Leong wrote:
>>> CBFalconer <cbfalco...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> Eric Leong wrote:
>>>>
>>>> ... snip ...
>>
>>>>> The auction is:
>>>>> 1D 1H
>>>>> 2H ?
>>>>> holding S xxxx H Axxxx D x C KQx
>>
>>>>> Do you invite?
>>
>>>> Since it makes 4H opposite an ideal opener, the answer is yes.
>>>> Another way to look at it is that it contains 9 HCP and 2
>>>> distributional points, for 11, so opener needs only 15 for a
>>>> suitable game contract.
>>
>>> One might think holding a stiff in partner's suit is not worth
>>> two distributional points.
>>
>> To the contrary, it is an indication that such things as
>> cross-ruffs are likely to work nicely. It is greatly preferable,
>> for example, to a doubleton. For example with a club lead
>> partners hand of:
>>
>> A Kxxx Axxxx Jxx
>>
>> will probably wrap 4H. Other leads may take more care. You
>> won't get there, but so what?
>
> after your stiff. But one would think in the suit your partner
> opens that there is more likely going to be some wastage opposite
> the stiff then not. Give partner something like:
> S Qxx H KQxx D AQJx C xx for his 2H raise and now partner
> would probably raise to an inferior 4H after an invititation.
That was an ideal hand, and wasn't expected to answer the
invitation. On your hand I think I would degrade the spades, and
am unsure about raising any invitation. Generally, flat hands are
worth less. Even if taken, it won't be the first time I've been in
a 10% game or worse.
--
[mail]: Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
[page]: <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>
Try the download section.
CBFalconer
> Eric Leong <ewleong...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
**** Fixed faulty quoting ****
>> What did I stoop to?
>> You gave as examples for opener as after the bidding:
>>
>> 1D 1H
>> 2H ?
>
> extend a thread through deliberate stupidity.
>
> Is it really so hard to understand that 1d 1h 2h is a more
> narrowly defined raise than 1c 1h 2h because there are twice as
> many temporizing bids available to opener in the former sequence
> than the latter?
Oh? The temporizing bids available are: 1S, 1NT, 2C, 2D, 2H, with
only 2D lost after a 1C opening bid.
>
> Is it really so hard to understand that because 1d 1h 2s is a
> more narrowly defined raise than 1c 1h 2h, some hands that might
> bid on after the latter (because it is less narrowly defined)
> might pass after the former (because it is more narrowly defined)?
How did the black suits get into this auction? I expect the enemy
holds them.
dranon
I had thought I was contrasting 2H vs. pass. But the same certainly
goes for 3C.
Will in New Haven
> On Jun 1, 4:57 pm, Will in New Haven <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jun 1, 3:04 pm, henrysun...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> > > On Jun 1, 8:40 am, Eric Leong <ewleong...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > But game does pay a bonus since I last looked.
>
> > > Eric Leong
>
> > > ************
>
> > > Is there really a hand that can be constructed where rebidding 2h will
> > > get to a game that 3c will not also reach?
>
> > > "I highly doubt that" - Wil Smith, I, Robot
>
> > I don't think bidding 3C will get you to 4H opposite
> > A-QX-AXXXX-AJXXX but 2H sure will. Is it always down? No. But it's a
> > lousy contract.
>
> > --
> > Will in New Haven
>
> I don't think the hand given is a 4H bid over 2H but I would accept 3H
> which would be passed and has reasonable chances of making.
It's a 4H bid if your 2H bid shows six Hearts and a hand worth the
original 1H response.
> Still if I am to be charged with being in 4H with the hand given then
> I think I should be given credit for keeping the bidding open and
> reaching an excellent 4H countract with either:
>
> S x H KQx D Axxxx C AJxx
>
> S x H KQx D Axxx C AJxxx
>
> both of which are weaker in hcp and produce game that you would
> certainly want to be there.
>
> Please note in the last example you wouldn't mind being in 6H.
We would reach game in Hearts over a 3C rebid by responder in both
those cases. It is very likely I would have raised Hearts with either
of those hands anyway. On those hands, only pass by responder, which
was chosen by both the experts who were consulted, loses.
--
Will in New Haven
>
> Eric Leong
>
>
>
>
>
> > > Henrysun, TFMMB (the first misogynistic misologic blowhard)- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Will in New Haven
> On Jun 1, 12:04 pm, henrysun...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> > On Jun 1, 8:40 am, Eric Leong <ewleong...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > But game does pay a bonus since I last looked.
>
> > Eric Leong
>
> > ************
>
> > Is there really a hand that can be constructed where rebidding 2h will
> > get to a game that 3c will not also reach?
>
> > "I highly doubt that" - Wil Smith, I, Robot
>
>
> maximum. For example:
>
> S Kx S xxxx
> H Kx H Axxxx
> D KJxxx D x
> C Axxx C KQx
>
> If you rebid 2H, partner will almost certainly pass.
I would rebid 1NT on the opener's hand. Then we play in 2H.
Will in New Haven
> On Jun 2, 7:17 pm, CBFalconer <cbfalco...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Eric Leong wrote:
>
> > ... snip ...
>
> > > The auction is:
> > > 1D 1H
> > > 2H ?
> > > holding S xxxx H Axxxx D x C KQx
>
> > > Do you invite?
>
> > Since it makes 4H opposite an ideal opener, the answer is yes.
> > Another way to look at it is that it contains 9 HCP and 2
> > distributional points, for 11, so opener needs only 15 for a
> > suitable game contract.
>
> One might think holding a stiff in partner's suit is not worth two
> distributional points.
I think there's something to that but it's overdone. No one using
mainstream methods has chosen their one-bids by honor location in a
long time. Partner might have a lot of wasted strength in Diamonds and
he might not. It's a seven-loser hand but it's not a good seven-loser
hand. Since my partner can't have a Weak NT for this auction, I would
have a game try or maybe a game bid. In standard methods a game-try is
borderline.
--
Will in New Haven
>
> Eric Leong
>
>
>
>
>
> > --
> > [mail]: Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
> > [page]: <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>
> > Try the download section.
>
> > ** Posted fromhttp://www.teranews.com**- Hide quoted text -
Will in New Haven
Play much at the Griffins?
--
Will in New Haven
.- Hide quoted text -
Bob Lipton
> On Jun 3, 1:39 am, Eric Leong <ewleong...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On Jun 2, 7:17 pm, CBFalconer <cbfalco...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Eric Leong wrote:
>>> ... snip ...
>>>> The auction is:
>>>> 1D 1H
>>>> 2H ?
>>>> holding S xxxx H Axxxx D x C KQx
>>>> Do you invite?
>>> Since it makes 4H opposite an ideal opener, the answer is yes.
>>> Another way to look at it is that it contains 9 HCP and 2
>>> distributional points, for 11, so opener needs only 15 for a
>>> suitable game contract.
>> One might think holding a stiff in partner's suit is not worth two
>> distributional points.
>
> I think there's something to that but it's overdone. No one using
> mainstream methods has chosen their one-bids by honor location in a
> long time. Partner might have a lot of wasted strength in Diamonds and
> he might not. It's a seven-loser hand but it's not a good seven-loser
> hand. Since my partner can't have a Weak NT for this auction, I would
> have a game try or maybe a game bid. In standard methods a game-try is
> borderline.
>
> --
First, not look at honor location is a mistake. Second, playing my
methods, partner can hold up to a poor seventeen points which would make
3NT attractive. But in evaluating his hand, partner needs to realize
that I am basing my free raise on that possibility.
Bob
Will in New Haven
Not looking at honor location is a mistake common to all standard
bidding methods. People open the pattern XX-XXXXX-XXXX-XX 1H when they
open, regardless of honor location. Certainly, having honors in the
longs suit(s) influences _whether_ one opens but it doesn't influence
what suit one opens. Partner will have opened, a 2-2-5-4 (outside the
range for a NT bid) 1D even if his honors are all outside Diamonds,
once he determines that he must open the bidding. I think "shortness"
in partner's suit as an alarm signal is overdone when partner has
opened a one-bid and not shown great strength. I don't say that it
isn't something of an indication. I just said that people over-value
its importance.
--
Will in New Haven
>
> Bob- Hide quoted text -
henry...@yahoo.com
HS: Is it really so hard to understand that 1d 1h 2h is a more
narrowly defined raise than 1c 1h 2h because there are twice as
many temporizing bids available to opener in the former sequence
than the latter?
CBF: Oh? The temporizing bids available are: 1S, 1NT, 2C, 2D, 2H,
with
only 2D lost after a 1C opening bid.
*************
Chuck,
apparently you are not understanding the meaning of a 'temporizing
bid' in this context, which refers to the bidding of a short, usually
3 card, suit to mark time for one round and hope to get back on
track. examples of such a bid are, oddly enough, 1s when holding
AKx
KQx
x
QJxxxx
which is too strong for a 2c or 2h rebid but not strong enough for a
3h or 3c rebid. Hence, opener rebids 1s, hoping to get a chance to
bid 2h on the third round and thereby showing his unbalanced hand with
3 card support and around 14-ish to 16 hcps.
When one opens 1d and gets a 1h response, opener has two such bids
available to him, 1s and 2c. But when one opens 1c and gets a 1h
response, opener has only one such bid available, namely 1s. 2d, a
reverse, is available but since it is forcing and since responder does
not have to have a 5-card heart suit, it is dangerous when responder
is weak and misfits clubs.
the simple rebid of 1nt and the rebid of the opened minor are never
considered temporizing bids, at least as far as I know.
Henrysun909, TFMMB
henry...@yahoo.com
Oh come now Sid, we all know Eric can take it personally when we
question his decisions. He has been known to use an uncharitable
phrase [calling me for example a "mental midget" when we were arguing
-- in the Aristotelian sense from my side of course, no rancor, just
clash of fact and logic :) -- over a hand evaluation that differed by
perhaps a quarter or half a point]. He has been observed to turn more
truculent while he is entrenching his position deeper and deeper
against all comers. I have even noticed that he will occasionally
sidestep or perhaps [inadvertently I expect despite my suspicions]
obfuscate an argument to the contrary. Rarely have I seen a "you may
be right" except when accompanied by a reference to "buying a lottery
ticket".
I don't think these are grossly exaggerated observations. That Henry
has coined a phrase that summarizes the previous paragraph hardly
qualifies as vile or vicious, there is no real intent to villify or
hurt. And it is anything but stupid, perhaps a tiny bit wicked if you
like.
Nothing any of us might write will impede him. Nor would we want to.
It would spoil a good bit of our fun. And everything else is
transient.
== Bill Shutts
*****************
Come on, Bill, you need to shutts the frick up rofl.
In spite of repeated attempts to answer Eric's questions, none of
which he appears to have read, i will answer them, again, here: With
xxxx Axxxx x KQx
if partner opens 1c and raises my 1h response to 2h, I will 100% of
the time invite game by rebidding 3c. This addresses Eric's x; KQx;
Axxx; AJxxx hand.
If partner opens 1d and rebids 2c over my 1h response, I will raise to
3c and if partner shows 3 hearts and a 2 1/2 heart raise by bidding
3h, I will bid game. This addresses Eric's x; KQx; Axxxx; AJxx hand.
If partner opens 1d and raises my 1h response to 2h, I will 100% of
the time invite game by rebidding 3c even though this sequence is more
narrowly limited than the first and hence there is a greater chance of
getting too high with this hand. This addresses the new sequence that
Eric slipped into the conversation after he posted his first two hands
as the reason for why a 2h rebid with xxxx Axxxx x KQx is superior to
a 3c rebid.
Hopefully, that is clear enough for even Eric to understand.
And in the interests of not proleonging the thread, I hereby
graciously bow out.
Eric, take your ongoing best shots. As you said previously, it's not
worth having a conversation with someone who will neither read nor
listen.
Henrysun909, TFMMB
OldPalooka
kingfish
>
> - Show quoted text -
***
I one of the early issues of "Bridge Today", when it was a printed
product, Al Roth had a column where he posed a bidding question to the
public, and he published expert responses with their comments along
with a few "public" responses. One hand was someting like: xxxx,
Axxx, xx, KQx held by responder in the auction:
1D - 1H
2C - ?
To a man the expert response was 2D, a false preference to allow
opener another chance to call. Eric's 2H re-bid (and mine as well) is
based on this theory. In my case, Opener has shown at a minimum a
strong 1NT in values and promised another call.
Sandy Barnes
***
StevieTee
>
> One hand was someting like: xxxx,
> Axxx, xx, KQx held by responder in the auction:
> 1D - 1H
> 2C - ?
>
> To a man the expert response was 2D, a false preference to allow
> opener another chance to call. Eric's 2H re-bid (and mine as well) is
> based on this theory. In my case, Opener has shown at a minimum a
> strong 1NT in values and promised another call.
>
> Sandy Barnes
Huh??? In the sequence
1D 1H
2C
"Opener has shown at a minimum a strong 1NT in values..."???
I don't know what system requires 15+ hcps for a 2C rebid, but it's
not one that I am familiar with...
Steve Sun
henry...@yahoo.com
I doubt we would be having this discussion if responder had a
doubleton diamond. Then the false preference to 2d might be a
unanimous bid, even with
xxx
Axxxx
xx
KQx
because it does not have the flaw of 2h (not 6 hearts, or 5 good ones)
or of 3c (not 4 clubs).
Henrysun909, TFmMB
henry...@yahoo.com
Well, Steve, that's because you've been away from the game for so
long.
Both old-fashioned KS and all versions of Roth-Stone played that
particular sequence (1d 1M 2c) as promising substantial extra values.
KS defined it as being the equivalent to a reverse but RS was not that
detailed. As a consequence, when opener has
xx
x
AKxxx
KQxxx
in KS the bidding is 1d 1M 3c (= both minors, 11-15 hcps) and in RS
the bidding is 1d 1M 2d (minimum hand, with clubs to be shown later).
Neither method has achieved anywhere near a majority following in the
US, but an artificial 2c rebid showing 3 card support for responder's
major (Cole) or strength (Gazzilli) attracts some followers.
Henrysun909, TFMMB
Will in New Haven
In modern Kaplan-Sheinwald, the sequence 1D-1M-2C is forcing and I
can't think of any hand you would use it with that wouldn't be worth a
strong NT or more. The weak minor two-suiter rebids 3C. The weak 5-4
hands are opened 1NT or aren't opened at all or the five-bagger is
rebid. I might bid the stronger sequence without fifteen _high-card
points_ but my hand would be stronger than a minimum strong NT.
--
Will in New Haven
>
> Steve Sun
StevieTee
>
> > I don't know what system requires 15+ hcps for a 2C rebid, but it's
> > not one that I am familiar with...
>
> > Steve Sun
>
> Well, Steve, that's because you've been away from the game for so
> long.
>
> Both old-fashioned KS and all versions of Roth-Stone played that
> particular sequence (1d 1M 2c) as promising substantial extra values.
> KS defined it as being the equivalent to a reverse but RS was not that
> detailed. As a consequence, when opener has
>
> xx
> x
> AKxxx
> KQxxx
>
> in KS the bidding is 1d 1M 3c (= both minors, 11-15 hcps) and in RS
> the bidding is 1d 1M 2d (minimum hand, with clubs to be shown later).
>
> Neither method has achieved anywhere near a majority following in the
> US, but an artificial 2c rebid showing 3 card support for responder's
> major (Cole) or strength (Gazzilli) attracts some followers.
OK, well, none of these methods is what I would consider to be
"standard," which is what I thought to be the context of the
discussion that was going on within this thread....
Steve Sun
Will in New Haven
You are correct and I thought that some of the answers strayed from
that premise, especially the one to which you were replying. I
answered in the context of standard bidding. On the other hand, the
general idea that five-baggers are, or can be, rebiddable when the bid
is forcing and aren't when the bid isn't forcing impacts these methods
also. It is ok, even mandatory, to rebid 2H in those methods where the
2C rebid is forcing and promises one more bid (on most auctions) but I
think it is foolish to the point of stupidity to rebid a bad five-card
suit when the most likely expectation is that partner will pass.
--
Will in New Haven
>
> Steve Sun- Hide quoted text -