PhantomSac

Is the ability to play in 3C more important than the ability to show both 5 card major and force and to get out in 3 of a major?

If I didn't know better I'd think you were MY gimmick.

Epic gimmick.

Pass is really tempting because it's MP w/r (aint it always) but your spots are just too bad and it's a pretty wild gamble early in the hand. I'd just bid 1N.

IMO 1S 2H 3D 3S specifically could be a doubleton, and 3N over that just shows a club stopper.

Pretty gross spot...dunno what I'd do. Pass, X, 3S, and 3N all have some merit and are all terribly flawed. I think I'd bid 3S.

I had a good agreement with a partner once, transfers over all value showing 2N bids (with a couple of exceptions). Worked well. Barring that I'd agree with Han.

IMO there are several things to think about: 1) Would LHO lead a stiff heart with stiff SK? With stiff SJ? With a small stiff spade? With Kx of spades? Etc. As I said LHO is talented but inexperienced and thus pretty erratic (capable of very good plays/thoughts, but also capable of some poor ones), so it's hard to tell, but I think you can attempt to weight the likelihood that he leads a stiff heart with various trump holdings. 2) How weak could LHO bid 2N if he's 5-5? Should you take some 5-5s out of his range because they are too weak, while keeping in the 6-5s? Again, who knows, but you can try to weight them. 3) Why would RHO duck or cover the heart? Obviously covering blows a trick, and ducking gives you an entry. Are there technical elements to this (ie certain hands should always duck or always cover), or is it all purely psychological. Obv you can try to ignore what I did, or you can try to guess what level I'm on and try to exploit me, your choice. Adding this all up, what is the right line, and does my play impact what you think the right play is. Obv I don't know the answers to these questions, they're all very subjective etc, but I think they are the crux of this hand.

I'd probably bid 1D p p 1H p 1N p p p. No idea where I want to be, too late for that!

Signoff.

I think Fred posted on here once that X should be responsive of a weak 2S bid, as opposed to penalty of a 1S bid. They are just far less likely to psyche a weak 2S bid, and if they aren't psyching you're far less likely to have a penalty X (whereas over a 1S non psyche you could easily have a X), and finally you need a responsive double more as playing a 4-3 fit at the 3 level is not good. That being said, I don't know if that's a standard definition, I would take it as penalty undiscussed probably.

They didn't have strong meanings when they played Multi, which they no longer do, retreating to short ♦ 2♦ and weak twos in the majors. I didn't realize. I thought they used 2H for short diamonds where Multi was permitted. They did this a long time ago but not recently. They thought multi was a big loser against good opps. They also scratched their 9-12 NT for the same reason. Really? They don't play 9-12 at favorable? Long ago scratched...seems like you have a quite old version of their system.

They didn't have strong meanings when they played Multi, which they no longer do, retreating to short ♦ 2♦ and weak twos in the majors. I didn't realize. I thought they used 2H for short diamonds where Multi was permitted. They did this a long time ago but not recently. They thought multi was a big loser against good opps. They also scratched their 9-12 NT for the same reason.

[hv=v=b&n=sq753hj842dq53c93&s=sat842haktdak7ct2]133|200|Scoring: IMP[/hv] Auction starting with partner: P P 1S 2N P 3C X P 4S p p p They lead a relatively quick H9, you put in the jack. Your RHO thinks forever and: 1) Plays low 2) Plays the queen How do you play in each scenario? RHO is me, LHO is an inexperienced but talented junior.

I don't understand these fancy signals I guess... playing upside down I would take a high diamond as discouraging meaning west does not have a high diamond honor which makes the defense very easy.

Huh? If west loves spades he can just bid 4D over 3S. Why would rebidding his suit be coming in spades?

How is this an ATB? East could try playing bridge. West could get a new pard I guess.

1C then 2C, not remotely close to anything else.

Ok fair enough, I think I said in that thread that I have no idea what standard is (don't remember, but I definitely don't, pretty sure I said that but sorry if I didn't). I just offered how I learned it... I agree with you in that auction one shouldn't pass undiscussed, it might even be a splinter.

I think he meant 4H after 4D

The fact that you read old books, and even the fact that that is superior to learning from mediocre "experts" does not mean that it is standard to do so. It does not mean that what you read in those old books is standard. Thinking that the average person is reading outdated books from people they've never heard of and then thinking that they are easily figuring out the modifications is funny. Did you not notice that in my post I put "expert" in quotation marks? I am aware that people learn bad things from bad people, the point is they're more likely to learn what joe shmoe at the club taught them, and joe shmoe is probably teaching them the "trendy" thing to play, not what root recommended 30 years ago. Also a complete lol @ all of you people who pretty much never play bridge, and spend most of your time reading (zomg yes people who read an internet bridge forum are more likely to read old books and learn from them than average) about bridge consistently acting like I am out of touch because I am a good player who is friends with good players (and has a dad who has no clue about conventions/ what people play). I am sorry that I'm good but that is pretty much only because I spend most of my time playing at a variety of venues/regions against a variety of players with a variety of partners talking bridge with a wide variety of players (including on this forum). To consistently act like you know more about what most people play than me simply because I'm good is pretty funny. I would say that most people who play one way NMF would not play 2D as NMF. Most people who learn new minor forcing these days learn jumps = inv, and NMF then bid = forcing. Whether that is theoretically correct, or whether the people who teach this are good at bridge or not, it doesn't matter. I think that saying that because YOU read root/pavlicek from 30 years ago rather than listen to the shady people who teach these conventions, THAT way is standard, makes you the one who is out of touch. In fact, you are the one who said earlier that most people play it the opposite way of Root/Pavlicek, which seems to validate my point? Do you just disagree that a "standard" way to play a convention is defined by what most people play and we are just into semantics or what?

This is very misleading because we aren't talking about standard, we are talking about standard in the context of people who play 2D as NMF. It is non standard to play nmf (especially 2D here as NMF).

Master of the understatement!

Yeah this is how I've always described it heh. Yes I don't know many people who play it, I played it with Kev and I think Jdonn plays it (?) but don't know of anyone else, though I think I read it in print somewhere. Definitely unusual, but so is KI to begin with heh. If one finds transfers too difficult I still think it's hugely worthwhile to play a simpler version of KI.

Only because the JS was into clubs so there is a free 3♦ bid. It wouldn't promise 6 after 3♦ although it still usually would be. Yeah maybe you are the one who's normal, I still like 3D as natural when I have eg xxxx x KQTxx xxx or whatever which has a big impact on my 3S bids obv.