bidding plan?

[jdeegan]

I also like 2C followed by delayed texas if no spade fit is found. This hand is strong enough to force to game with 6-4.

:rolleyes: Heavenly days! Delayed Texas?? What will they think of next?? Might I entreat you discuss the pros and cons of this treatment? After all, you are giving up the ever popular sequence: 1NT - pass - 2♣ - pass - 2♦ - pass - 4♦

 

in order to use it.

 

By the way, it looks to me that example hand in question might actually play better from the 4-6 side. Certainly, it would be harder to defend accurately.

[Guest Jlall]

Not many pros or cons of it.

 

Pros:

 

rightside the contract more often (I agree with you that in this case our side might play better, but since partner will have more points, hes likely to have more tenaces, so its more likely he should be playing it etc).

 

you give away less info than smolen (if you were to go through smolen pard might bid 3N so the opps know he has only 2 hearts, or he might bid 4 of a minor and they can lead more accurately).

 

Cons:

 

you lose 1N-2C-2D-4D which has no useful meaning that I know of anyways. I'm sure someone can come up with one :rolleyes:

[Fluffy]

splinter of course! :rolleyes:

[TheoKole]

With nine points and the majors, I am going for game and the major decision is how to go about it.

 

While I am normally a bit agressive in bidding but I do not like the spots on either of the major suits, that being said my regular partner is a very good declarer and this would sway me in the bidding. With 8 points and bad spots I would use our regular sign-off bids.

 

I would bid Stayman on this and if I do not hear a major would would then use Delayed Texas Transfer to 4 ♥.

 

The bidding would go 1 NT -> 2 ♣ -> 2 ♦ -> 4 ♦ -> 4 ♥ -> Pass

 

Obviously if if my partner bid a major in resonse to Stayman I would raise to game in that suit. This has the advantage of right-siding the contract to the strong hand for all contracts. If my hand was 5-4 in the majors I would use Smolen, 2 ♣ Stayman and then bidding my 4 card major at the 3 level if I had a negative response, that way partner can play in the 5-3 fit if available or in 3 NT.

 

Theo

[Winstonm]

(Oops.  Didn't see this one right.  Thought it 5/4.  Oh, well.  Being 6/4 I like Justin's treament.)

 

IMO, there are many sequences where is it correct to separate the meanings whether playing MP or IMPs, and this is one of those cases.

 

At MPs, it is right to find the best partscore; however, at imps, the emphasis should be on getting to game and slams.

 

Therefore, this hand is a good example of using "invitational or better Smolen" at the 2 level.

 

1N-2C

2D-2S.

 

Partner will bid 2N, 3N, 3H or 4H with confindence of the strength of the hand he is facing and you have told your story.

 

To compensate for this treatment, with a weak hand 54 you have to transfer into your long major and pass.  Time to time you might play in a 5/2 instead of a 4/4 at the 2 level.  Not much of a price to pay for being able to describe a game try hand adequately I don't think.

 

Winston

If you want to play this then I suugest that you bid the major in which you have 5 so that you can stop in 2H with 4-5 in the majors. Seems more important than rightsiding. (not to suggest that I would want to play this, I don't think that there should be many auctions that show invitational hands).

One of the benefits of utilizing 2-level Smolen as a 1-round force is not so much to include invitational hands but that by including invitational or better hands it frees the jumps to 3H and 3S for other uses, such as 1444 or 4144 hands. At imps, it would seem more important to get the game-going hands right and sacrifice the ability to play specifially a 4/4 fit over a 5/2 fit at the 2 level.

 

I wouldn't want to reverse the responses because most of the time the hand will still be game strength or even a slam try and right siding becomes more important, and besides, the concept is to make it a 1-round force so that not only are the inviational hands bid this way but so are the game force hands and slam hands.

Just seems to me that if you can add invitational hands into this mix without messing up the good hands, and that leaves another bid open for a better use, why not do it?

 

Winston