Walddk Posted October 7, 2005 Report Share Posted October 7, 2005 Well, it is P who created the GF by bidding 2 ♠, not me. Must be your individual agreement with your favourite partner. I don't know anyone who plays 2♠ (or any new suit for that matter) as game forcing after an overcall. One round force, yes, or even non-forcing if you play "negative free bids". Roland Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted October 7, 2005 Report Share Posted October 7, 2005 (edited) 2NT if I succeed in bidding it a tempo with a poker face. 3♠ it I'm worried about ethical issues. Oops I wrote 2♠, you're right, Cherdano, an insufficent bid is probably not the best way to deal with an ethical problem ;) Edited October 7, 2005 by helene_t Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted October 7, 2005 Report Share Posted October 7, 2005 I've said this several times, but I reiterate it: description of shape and hcp should take precedence over location of honors. This conclusion is not mine. It's Goren's. In this problem, it means: you mussn't worry about stoppers before you have described your hand accurately in terms of shape and hcp. Therefore, I believe the technically correct bid is 2NT. Sure, you may go down in 2NT, but in the long run this is the bid that will lead to the best results on average. It is only AFTER the shape/hcp description is finished that you need to worry about stoppers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al_U_Card Posted October 7, 2005 Report Share Posted October 7, 2005 I think that the only alternative is 3S. 3S, except when partner passes or bids game holding 4 H cards and 11 hcp..... In which case pard misbid with 2♣ by not making a neg x. I agree . Too many pick-up pards I guess.....But looking at AKJxx xxxx Qxx x he might just want to bid his best suit before the 5 level appears..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inquiry Posted October 7, 2005 Report Share Posted October 7, 2005 You have ♠xx, ♥AKTx, ♦AJ9x, ♣Jxx Bidding: 1♦(by you) - 2♣ - 2♠ - pass ? :P 2NT. sigh. Some time ago Mishovnbg started describing some transfer advance system he likes he termed "Equality". This method almost never uses negative double (GASP) so never will be popular. And it has some other problems, but on this hand, equality would have worked out better I think. In equality, after 1♦=(2♣)-? the bids are: DBL Regular takeout double, wow. 2D “5+ hearts, RF”2H “5+ spades, RF”2S Spades, not forcing2NT Weak or game forcing raise3C Mixed raise, not game forcing3D Weak (but not desperately weak)3H/3S Fit jump4C SplinterSo if partner had bid 2♠ = negative free bid type thing you pass... and if partner had bid 2♥ to show 5+[sp\ and one round force, you would bid 2♠ to show a weak hand and possible as few as two spades. On auctions where BOTH minors have been bid naturally ( that is 1D-(2C), and 1♣-(1♦) ), the usual equality rules are slighly different. In the first case, dbl is negative, in the second case, the 1♠ bid is changed. Equality can be found in the archives here back about 18 months or you can find it on Dan Neil's webpgage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeh Posted October 7, 2005 Report Share Posted October 7, 2005 Well, it is P who created the GF by bidding 2 ♠, not me. Must be your individual agreement with your favourite partner. I don't know anyone who plays 2♠ (or any new suit for that matter) as game forcing after an overcall. One round force, yes, or even non-forcing if you play "negative free bids". Roland2♠ as game force in this situation: I play that with several partners. I also play it as purely a 1 round force with a couple of others. My experience is that there is not much to choose between the two approaches: but my game is built around imps, and gf is (I think) decidely inferior at mps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted October 7, 2005 Report Share Posted October 7, 2005 I have to agree with Ben that this is a VERY good auction for equality. I've been struggling with the method and there are several auctions where I wish the negative double was back. I think that there are more negatives in the following sentence than Ben intended: This method doesn't almost never use negative double (GASP) so never will be popular. :( :o Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al_U_Card Posted October 7, 2005 Report Share Posted October 7, 2005 This method doesn't almost never use negative double (GASP) so never will be popular. :D :D Translated into english, this means that because it almost always uses negative doubles it will never be popular........which IS possible, I suppose.... :D (not to be confused with double negatives which aren't never used in bridge...lol) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Double ! Posted October 10, 2005 Report Share Posted October 10, 2005 FYI The Double Negative bid in bridge is a specialized convention for partners who have severe cases of Oppositional-Defiant Disorder, abbreviated "O.D.D." It (O.D.D.) manifests itself in many different ways at the bridge table such as refusing to raise partner when holding trump support, refusing to show a 4-card major when P opens 1m, or ignoring partner's defensive signals. (And, yes, this is a real Psychiatric diagnosis. Does anyone know anyone who qualifies? Treatment is available.) lol: double negatives can obviously also refer to responses that show very weak hands in response to forcing bids. DHL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.