Flem72

Playing WNT 2/1, what do you expect -- shape and values -- from opener and from responder after: 1D-1S 2D-3C 3N-4S? Regards and Happy Trails, Scott Needham Boulder, Colorado, USA

Meckwell don't play in GCC events, now, do they? However, when I discussed these emails with some of our very experienced local players, including a couple of directors, they were all a bit perplexed, saying that they often respond 1M to 1D on 3 when playing inverted minors. Is this one of those "so long as partner must assume it's intended as natural" things, like bidding the unbid minor when not playing NMF in 1m-1M/1N-2om? Regards and Happy Trails, Scott Needham Boulder, Colorado, USA

T'anks for the response. Slight correction: The first quoted portion immediately below the first "snip" is not my assertion, but a third-party response to a post I made. I realize this does not qualify your response; nothing explains the contradiction in responses from Rulings/Flader, except perhaps differences in the way the question was framed by me as opposed to the third-party. SN

T'anks. Due to inexplicable inhibition of the scrolling action, I hadn't even seen that forum. Moving there. Is it possible to delete the thread from this forum?

OK, breach of decorum I guess -- where would you put it?

I like to play a WNT system in which a 1D response to 1C or a 1M response to 1D may be made on 3 cards. I say "may," but this kind of sequence will occur when R is weak, 4-8 HCP, and flat. This distinction between "may" and "will" could be the key to resolving the apparent conflict between these two pieces of correspondence (the first posted to r.g.b): | Having spent an hour or so pondering the mysteries of the General | Conditions and Midchart, and looking at ACBL's alertable calls | pages, I have concluded that it is General Conditions-legal to | respond 1D to 1C, and 1M to 1D, with fewer than 4 cards so long as | the call is alerted as a "may be short" kind of thing. | | Anyone have certain knowledge regarding this issue? | | Regards and Happy Trails, | | Scott Needham Boulder, Colorado, USA I have "certain" knowledge in the form of an email from Flader. Both he and Beyes reviewed. A 3card major response to a minor suit opening is considered a treatment and, as such, is legal in all GCC events provided it is alerted. A 1D response to 1C can be anything you want... ********************************************************** | [mailto:jsn_colorado@comcast.net] To: Rulings@acbl.org Sent: Mon, | 18 Jul 2011 15:30:09 -0600 Subject: 1C-1D and 1D-1M | | Having spent an hour or so pondering the mysteries of the General | Conditions and Midchart, and looking at ACBL's alertable calls | pages, I have concluded that it is General Conditions-legal to | respond 1D to 1C, and 1M to 1D, with fewer than 4 cards so long as | the call is alerted as a "may be short" kind of thing and is not | part of a relay structure. | | Am I correct? | | Regards and Happy Trails, | | Scott Needham Boulder, Colorado, USA Dear Scott, You are correct about a 1D response to a 1C opening, but, a 1 of a major response that may be fewer than four cards is a convention and not permitted. Note that conventional responses are permitted as long as they show game going values and are not part of a relay system. 1D is allowed because it is specifically describred on the GCC. Regards, Mike Flader ********************************************************** Anyone with experience that might help me understand how to put the point more finely for resubmission to Rulings/Flader? Regards and Happy Trails, Scott Needham Boulder, Colorado, USA

The problem is that even a very weak perfecto has a great play for 6H or 6D, e.g., xx (QJTx) (Qxx) xxxx, and almost any good 1NTF hand, 9+, will make game (my partner would hold xx xxx xxx AKQxx :blink: ). But where are the Cs? I'm 90% expecting partner to do a drop-dead in Cs, so s/he may as well do it over 3H. Whatever, I'm calling 4D next, and hoping I don't hear 5C on xx xx xx KQxxxxx. Regards and Happy Trails, Scott Needham Boulder, Colorado, USA

Sorry, notation is probably idiosyncratic: 1H-2C/2H-2S/2N-4D, for example, = 1H-2C 2H-2S 2N-4D. SN

A confident assertion I made in another thread about a particular type of sequence started me to thinking. Having scanned some of the occasions when I've made the bids, I now think I may have gotten away with a significant breach of 2/1 structure simply b/c, in the context, the implications didn't matter. Now, I'm considerably more mushy. It has to do with auctions of the type 1H-2C/2H-2S in 2/1. If We were to continue 1H-2C/2H-2S/2N-4D, 1H-2C/2H-2S/2N-4H, or 1H-2C/2H-2S/3D-4H, what would most 2/1 players think R's hand should look like? To put a finer point on it: Would most advanced/expert 2/1 players expect Hx or xxx H support or are these auctions allowed to show 4-3-1-5? If the latter is allowed, isn't the auction slam invitational opposite O's announced minimumish hand? The structural principle at issue: Is R required to announce primary support for O's major at the 2nd turn or may s/he bid out pattern in this traditional way? (This thought is ill-formed enough -- consider 1S-2D/2S-3C/3N-4S: Is 1H-2C/2H-2S, the only R's reverse possible at the two level, a lone ranger for the question? -- that I will now announce: EDIT LIKELY. So set me straight.) edit: O's 2H rebid = generic min, does not claim 6 Regards and Happy Trails, Scott Needham Boulder, Colorado, USA

Double on GP, but if this is a FP, it seems to me that it is a "sound of the auction/table action" FP. My double of 4S has to sound like a general values kind of double, maybe long Ss, maybe not; with a good hand and long Cs, pard could've acted. If I had to guess, and that's the problem, I'd say pard holds a min 4-4-1-4 or (4)-(3)-1-5 that s/he doesn't like very much. Regards and Happy Trails, Scott Needham Boulder, Colorado, USA

I've studied this post. I'm in the "extra values" camp, and I like Flannery (can also get along without it) but I'm interested in this question only as a theoretical proposition. It seems to me on the examples given that the only clear advantage to the "4-5 at any strength" position is when one plays 1M-2C as may-be-a-balanced-GF-raise. Agree: 1H-2m/2H-2N/3S is NOT a pretty auction, not one that we'd like to have. Inelegant; too much space; 2C-may-be-a-balanced-GF-raise saves lots of room. But the auction is not uninformative: Surely it highlights a problem in om? And we are in a GF auction, maybe forcing to 4m, so we're not stopping at the 3 level. Partner knows we are min, and that om could be a problem and can make the 3N-or-raise-to-4H-on-Hx decision just as easily, can't s/he? 45xx opposite 4351: Can't R bid out _his/her_ shape, viz. 1H-2m/2H-2S? Now, R's 3rd round H raise shows the stiff as it always has traditionally--I believe in bidding around stiffs with 3-card support--but in the case at hand, O bids 3S. Note that I'm NOT saying that 1H-2x/2S on a min 4-5 is bad, or that this auction must require extras or the world will end tomorrow. But the true advantages seem anchored in the 2C balanced GF raise--you WILL lose the S most often if O doesn't rebid 2S. It also seems that immediate shape info is more important in slam possible auctions, while immediately limiting values matters more in choice of games auctions; avoiding the "we're-both-unlimited" problem many have highlighted matters a lot, and there is a huge ambiguity load on 1H-2m/2S if it can be a min. (Plus, in a tight 3N, concealing the 4S might be an advantage, although, perhaps, infrequently.) It seems to me that the flat 2C forcing raise almost requires that 1H-2m/2S be made on mins; in other 2/1 structures, it loks to be nearly a toss up, but it does create more certainty to use it as showing extras. Regards and Happy Trails, Scott Needham Boulder, Colorado, USA

So there's a hand in the current ACBL Bulletin that stirred the pot: Is S/F playable after a 1m-1M start? Bottom line is that I'd be interested in hearing about any structures that may be lurking in the void, but, in the meanwhile, some superficial cogitating.... Seems as if it may be playable after a NMFish auction, e.g., 1C-1H 1N-2D 2H, then cues etc with 3N being S/F on the ususal assumption that We have at least an 8-card major fit, etc. But what about a minor rebid auction, e.g., 1D-1H 2D-something forcing 3H-? Is 3N here ever playable as S/F? Seems not, unless there is some agreement serving as a corollary to NMF, i.e., the "something forcing" is _agreed_ as asking for 3-card support, not simply allowing it in the course of a normal auction. But then We mess up our normal "let's find 3N after a 1m start" strategies, and mess them up in a major way. Obviously, I haven't put much into this: I'm running off to a meeting and hoping the community will make up for my superficiality :blink: Regards and Happy Trails, Scott Needham Boulder, Colorado, USA

Prob'ly not the place to post this, but how in the world do I find the Lobby? SN

2 K-S ♥. Pard will call 2♠ w/5+, whereupon O raises to show precisely this hand (maybe a bit heavy). Pard's 2N is Ing/Leb/whatever-you-call-it, and O refuses the relay w/3♠; 3C is GF; etc. Way strong for 2S. Regards and Happy Trails, Scott Needham Enjoying Crested Butte, Colorado, USA

Dunno why, but I keep losing my reply window. Many prefer the serenity that manifests when the 2/1 suit is guaranteed to be 5+ cards. But then you need "something else" to handle (especially) the bigger flat, 3-card raises. I much prefer the "something" -- in an inv+ J2NT structure -- and will play generic 2C forcing only if forced. (H-m-m-m-m) Regards and Happy Trails, Scott Needham Today in one of the most beautiful places on earth, Crested Butte, Colorado

Let's say you have the methods to find out that opener has solid spades, and you bid 6S: 2S-P-2N-P 3N-P-6S AKQJxx xxxx xx x xx Axx Ax AKJTxx On my rough calc, it looks about 54%, even on a H lead, and probably better -- like 80%? -- on a D lead. Anyone care to sim this deal? Second question: What do you think of responder's decision to bid slam ? Regards and Happy Trails, Scott Needham Boulder, Colorado, USA

Not very happy. S/he better apologize for underholding. () But (this is mps--sorry, didn't specify; and, FYI, I'm not a doubler with this South hand type) even if partner is really bad for this auction, unless opps are Al Roth disciples, s/he's marked with SOMETHING. Like x JTxxx Kxx xxxx, or CK instead, or maybe HQ and CQ. So I get to play 3D undoubled, hoping They don't lead one, or -- much more likely in 2011 -- East will compete to 3H, in which case now either 3S or pass to partner's double (I'd call 3S at these colors). In context, is this sensible? or would this plan flag (a) a certifiable idiot, (b) a normal matchpoint fool or © merely an optimist? 6S is not out of the question with the actual layout; claiming shape AND strength with 3D would seem the best way to get there, especially if East DOES call 3H--now North has a road map, doesn't s/he? OTOH, the real disaster North hand would be x JTxxx xx xxxxx. Next board -- wish I'd emphasized the spades. Regards and Happy Trails, Scott Needham Boulder, Colorado, USA

I wish I knew of a way to change the 'subject' line to indicate the beginning of a Part 2, but in view of the responses I may abandon that idea anyway: Did no one think of 3D as a possible reopening call? I'm interested to hear what are the objections to this action. Regards and Happy Trails, Scott Needham Boulder, Colorado, USA

West deals, N-S vul North: x JTxxx AKx QTxx South: AKJT9x void QTxx AJx it starts: P-P-P-1S 2H-P-P-? I know there are a gazillion possibilities from here, but you gotta start at the beginning. I trust that permutations will manifest. Regards and Happy Trails, Scott Needham Boulder, Colorado, USA

One of my most persistent Bad Bridge Traits is to overbid my really big hands. Wish I didn't. Regards and Happy Trails, Scott Needham Boulder, Colorado, USA What was the Edgarism? Something to the effect of "If partner does not hold the presumed values, partner does not criticize you for overbidding. Partner apologizes for underholding"?

Another English idiom gone woefully off course. Google "redheaded stepchild."

Kaplan Inversion (a/k/a Kaplan Interchange) helps. (Note to ACBL Conventions Committee: Make it GCC!!!!!) But -- for purposes of this exercise-- whether the 1NT rebid shows 15-17 or 12-14 after 1H-1S, how big is your 5-1-3-4? My tendency has always been to open 5M hands 1WNT when the hand looks NTy, which usually means the suit is poor, and I'm more likely to open a 5H hand 1NT. If the suit is avg+, open 1M and rebid it. Ever notice that 1H-1S auctions create problems for many different systems, and that folks tend to gloss them over? Regards and Happy Trails, Scott Needham Boulder, Colorado, USA

Like Edgar and Norman: 1D-1H 2C*-2H** 3S***-BW... 6H or 7H * = 1RF, strength, not neccesarily length, 5+D ** = 5+ H, ambiguous as to strength, forcing *** = monster hand with H support and short S Regards and Happy Trails, Scott Needham Boulder, Colorado, USA

[quote What's the opening bid / later plan? 1 K-S C, then, if it's not all pass, 3 K-S C, claiming a one-suited, 9-trick hand. I'm telling you, K-S minor structures r duh bom. Regards and Happy Trails, Scott Needham Boulder, Colorado, USA

Seems to me that S may or may not be Serious (under pressure like that, N could hold a good WNT w/ 4S, couldn't s/he? OTOH, you figure they hold 9-10 HCP in H, not this paltry 5, so with a WNT N should hold D & C honors), but I agree that the 4H cue claims a C control -- so S has to cinch it up and BW relying upon the bona fides of N's claim to hold 3-level values and subsequent slam-interest. Once again I conclude: That's why they call 'em preempts. Regards and Happy Trails, Scott Needham Boulder, Colorado, USA