game try.

[matmat]

Over a 1M-2M sequence by a partnership a 3m game try is made.

 

what would you expect the minor holding to be if this were a natural game try, at least 3 cards vs. a help suit game try?

[655321]

No idea at all. ;)

 

Because I have no idea, I much prefer short suit game tries here.

[whereagles]

prefer it to show an empty suit, say xxx

[zasanya]

I prefer a helpsuit game try.

[P_Marlowe]

I prefer value showing.

 

Assuming you have the choice, you will have

KJx or better in the suit, but sometimes you

will just look at Axx or something similar.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[matmat]

I obviously asked the question incorrectly, as the answers are fuzzy. I (pardon my frankness) don't care what kind of game tries you like to play, or whether you like to psych them

 

What I would like to know is:

 

suppose the opponents have the (unobstructed) auction

 

1M-2M

3m(*)-4M

 

(*) - when asked about this bid the answer is:

[a] natural game try, at least 3 cards

help suit game try

 

 

 

What is the difference in the image you form of this minor suit holding before opening lead, depending on which of the descriptions you were given.

 

(or, equivalently, what is the difference in the holdings that would accept the game try, given the two different agreements/interpretations -- aside from the obvious fact that both are accepted with a maximum)

[Finch]

I've always assumed they meant much the same thing

[Cascade]

For me a help suit is a weak suit typically xxx but Qxx or Axxx or similiar could qualify.

 

When I have played natural long suit tries a much wider range of suits qualify and maybe some of those above do not KJxx AQxx QJxx etc which tell partner that a fitting card in this suit is gold.

[jdonn]

I feel strongly game tries should be suits with an honor, usually Qx(x) or Kx(x), or KJx etc. I think bidding it on xxx by agreement is one of the worst agreements you can have. You are guaranteeing them the best lead they can make.

 

Of course best of all is an asking bid about partner's values and to not make game tries that expose your hand.

[Trinidad]

What I would like to know is:

 

suppose the opponents have the (unobstructed) auction

 

1M-2M

3m(*)-4M

 

(*) - when asked about this bid the answer is:

    [a] natural game try, at least 3 cards

    help suit game try

 

 

 

What is the difference in the image you form of this minor suit holding before opening lead, depending on which of the descriptions you were given.

 

(or, equivalently, what is the difference in the holdings that would accept the game try, given the two different agreements/interpretations -- aside from the obvious fact that both are accepted with a maximum)

[a] I expect something like KJx(x), AJx(x), I would not expect xxxx or AKQx.

I would typically accept the game try with fitting honors, or with a long suit expecting to be able to set up the suit.

 

I expect length with at most one honor, preferably not the king.

I would typically accept the game try with shortness or some length with two fitting honors (say KQxx) and a decent hand.

[Codo]

Natural had shown just length in that suit to me, any thing from xxxx to AKxx possible.

A HSGT had shown broken values like KJxx to me.

 

I do not understand why it is defined differently in the other parts of the world.

 

If you bid a suit naturally you don't promise values in this suit, just length. But if you have something, but not enough, asking for help seems obvious.

[benlessard]

What you want to discover is if the Qs are working ? of if there is wasted values facing a stiff. A simple yet efficient method is that a direct bid show a stiff and the cheapest bid is a balanced articial and ask for a shortness.

 

 

1H---2H

2S (ask for a stiff/doubleton)

------3C stiff or doubleton C

 

This imo is only good in MP, in imps you should avoid game-tries at the 3 level like plague.