fit for p and opps. now what?

[pclayton]

I would take 3♦ as a splinter. For clubs, silly (offensive 3307 or something like that).

 

4♦ is a cue and cooperates (4N would be STFU). I would take 4N over 4♥ as key card. 4♠ is probably LTTC.

 

Earlier: 2♦ asks about a stop for NT I think and I'm fine with a redouble.

[jkdood]

"and I'm fine with a redouble..."

 

and presumably fine that surprise surprise we have a huge thread of folks disagreeing on strain follow-ups.

 

"Oh it must be Christmas redoubles" that have low percentage likelihood of "sticking the opps" often convolute the strain, and after some years of these surprises a new tact might be rewarded accordingly.

[cherdano]

"and I'm fine with a redouble..."

 

and presumably fine that surprise surprise we have a huge thread of folks disagreeing on strain follow-ups.

 

"Oh it must be Christmas redoubles" that have low percentage likelihood of "sticking the opps" often convolute the strain, and after some years of these surprises a new tact might be rewarded accordingly.

Lol, no serious posters in this thread had a disagreement on "strain follow-ups" (whatever that means). If you worry with every bid whether it might create an auction that jtfanclub might misunderstand, you run out of bids very quickly.

[jkdood]

Sometimes the auction starts 1C by Pard 1S by you, and rebids of 2N, 3D, 4D, 4C, 2H and such create an orderly and neat follow-up.

 

The opps may insert a x, and maybe even a competitive call, such as 1C, (x), 1S, (2D),... and now you have your support doubles and cuebids as well available, plus some idea of where the missing HCP's lie.

 

If you choose to give this "order" up with a highly-unlikely Christmas-seeking redouble, you frequently end up with a mess, and there is no doubt this auction and the variety of follow-up interpretations have become the forecast mess.

 

But at least we have an interesting thread and a little excitement :lol:

 

(PS: "Mess" reminder:

Serious Player 1: "Agree with jtfanclub, 3D is a stopper ask"

 

Serious Player 2: "A splinter in support of clubs or notrump?")

[matmat]

(PS: "Mess" reminder:

Serious Player 1: "Agree with jtfanclub, 3D is a stopper ask"

 

Serious Player 2: "A splinter in support of clubs or notrump?")

One of these two serious players was being 100% facetious.

[pclayton]

"and I'm fine with a redouble..."

 

and presumably fine that surprise surprise we have a huge thread of folks disagreeing on strain follow-ups.

 

"Oh it must be Christmas redoubles" that have low percentage likelihood of "sticking the opps" often convolute the strain, and after some years of these surprises a new tact might be rewarded accordingly.

Jay, isn't this an argument against any redouble? Seriously, what continuation are you worried about?

[jkdood]

And a 100% accurate when they said:

"I think I had a nightmare like this once or twice. "

 

Seriously, when you hide a biddable 4-card major (not to mention a biddable diamond suit and a fit for partner that may develop further in an orderly fashion) for a speculative low-level bounty of penalty reward, you are inviting trouble, (an eager party-crasher.)

 

(By the way, MatMat is a close friend and a fine and thoughtful player I have a lot of respect for. The xx was (IMHO) just a reasonable but low-percentage gamble that "surprise-surprise" didn't work out and made for an interesting thread.)

[benlessard]

I can live with a XX but not R vs W.

 

3D is 100% shortness showing a self sufficient suit.

If hes looking for a stopper he will just cue bid or bid his suit (forcing, the XX guarantee another bid). If you and your partner cant agree on this then ill say that youve got a significant problem here.

 

Opener doesnt have a D void since he would have bid 4D not 4 clubs. After 4H depending on my method, i show extras but no S controls. I expect opener hand to be something like

 

xx

AK

x

AQJxxxxx

[jtfanclub]

Lol, no serious posters in this thread had a disagreement on "strain follow-ups" (whatever that means). If you worry with every bid whether it might create an auction that jtfanclub might misunderstand, you run out of bids very quickly.

Just because I'm not used to seeing self-splinters at the 3 level....

 

I think most people are 'misunderstanding' this auction, since there seems to be significant disagreements with what the bids mean. I've heard 4♠, 4NT, and 5♣ all described as the signoff and/or LTTC. Heck, didn't one person think 4NT was RKC? Other people are making sample hands with two spade losers...and we're supposed to bid 5♦?

 

I understand that my meta-agreements here are far too common for you elites. But don't you think there's something to be said for 4♠ being a spade cue, 4NT being LTTC/nothing else to show, and 5♣ being a club cue? I don't mind y'all making fun of me, but in this case simple seems to be a good thing.

 

matmat- Justin was making a joke. Unfortunately, I haven't figured out which parts jdonn was joking about.

[cherdano]

Lol, no serious posters in this thread had a disagreement on "strain follow-ups" (whatever that means). If you worry with every bid whether it might create an auction that jtfanclub might misunderstand, you run out of bids very quickly.

Just because I'm not used to seeing self-splinters at the 3 level....

Not only that, you also thought there is such a thing as "cuebidding for NT".

[jdonn]

matmat- Justin was making a joke.  Unfortunately, I haven't figured out which parts jdonn was joking about.

And that's what makes it so funny, and why I am the supreme king of all things funny.

 

You are still trying to make a club cue!!! Ok now I'm even starting to feel bad so listen carefully..... CLUBS IS YOUR TRUMP SUIT! YOU DON'T MAKE CUEBIDS IN YOUR TRUMP SUIT! There, for once I wasn't joking!

[cherdano]

matmat- Justin was making a joke.  Unfortunately, I haven't figured out which parts jdonn was joking about.

And that's what makes it so funny, and why I am the supreme king of all things funny.

 

You are still trying to make a club cue!!! Ok now I'm even starting to feel bad so listen carefully..... CLUBS IS YOUR TRUMP SUIT! YOU DON'T MAKE CUEBIDS IN YOUR TRUMP SUIT! There, for once I wasn't joking!

Lol, I didn't even read this far.

[jkdood]

If anyone's convinced NOT to start with "xx", probably 1D is superior to 1S. Anytime pard has 4 spades and 5 clubs along with Kxx of H and a stiff d, no matter what the level, playing spades from his side seems far better.

[jtfanclub]

And that's what makes it so funny, and why I am the supreme king of all things funny.

Yes, for example, if I had realized your 5♦ call was a joke originally, I'd never have been sucked in.

 

I bow to your superior sense of humor.

[jdonn]

If anyone's convinced NOT to start with "xx", probably 1D is superior to 1S. Anytime pard has 4 spades and 5 clubs along with Kxx of H and a stiff d, no matter what the level, playing spades from his side seems far better.

Sorry not at all convinced. The lowest and most descriptive bid never seemed to cause the sort of problems for me that you describe!

 

And that's what makes it so funny, and why I am the supreme king of all things funny.

Yes, for example, if I had realized your 5♦ call was a joke originally, I'd never have been sucked in.

Come now, you know neither part of that statement is true!

[jkdood]

IF we all(?) take this 3D call by Pard to be a self-splinter with long clubs, do we infer it is exactly a singleton, since 4D was available?

 

What is 4D (by Pard) anyway, same hand with a void, and exclusion RKC then (if you play exclusion)?

 

(Oh and there WAS a time where "xx" almost always implied NO FIT! Then Jordan and his buddy Flip and Rev came along and it's another fine mess, Ollie :)

[jdonn]

IF we all(?) take this 3D call by Pard to be a self-splinter with long clubs, do we infer it is exactly a singleton, since 4D was available?

Yes

What is 4D (by Pard) anyway, same hand with a void,

Yes

and exclusion RKC then (if you play exclusion)?

No

 

Is any of that really so hard? :)

 

Sorry I somewhat misunderstood I think, i was referring to 4♦ over 3NT. If partner ever bids 4♦ directly over 1♦, shoot him.

[jkdood]

OK from now on I "xx". I always liked Christmas anyway, although I tired of the coal though.

 

(LOL I wrote this after reading your simple neat answer, then came back and checked MY post and saw you had just added "Sorry, 4d...." etc etc...

 

...so Now I edit MY post and add, I dunno, maybe I'll think of something :)

[gnasher]

Sorry I somewhat misunderstood I think, i was referring to 4♦ over 3NT. If partner ever bids 4♦ directly over 1♦, shoot him.

4♦ directly over 1♦ could reasonably be played as Exclusion (by agreement, of course).

[jkdood]

"Is any of that really so hard?"

 

I actually thought things were going along EASIER when other (serious players) suggested 3D was a stopper-ask (at least "for now") - then 3N was pretty clear-cut with AKxx.

 

But if partner can have KJx Kx x AQJxxxx for this self splinter, maybe 3n by me with a heart lead ain't so good, with 5C probably cold.

 

Hmmn.

[cherdano]

For those interested in the result, partner (me) had Axx Kx - AQJxxxxx. (I didn't cue 4♦ since I knew the ♦A would be a useful card for a discard.)

Did I overbid?

Slam is very good on the auction, and makes - opening leader is Morton forked at the opening lead! (He had both ♥A and ♠K.)

[jkdood]

Very welldone.

(I am assuming with all those controls A spds, Kx H, diamond void, and AQJ8th of c, that when partner cooperated for slam with 4D you knew "at least 6C" was right :lol:

 

(Hope you didn't bid 7 over 6 or sumfin)

[jdonn]

Very welldone.

(I am assuming with all those controls A spds, Kx H, diamond void, and AQJ8th of c, that when partner cooperated for slam with 4D you knew "at least 6C" was right :D

 

(Hope you didn't bid 7 over 6 or sumfin)

Wouldn't his partner still cuebid with QTxx T9 AQxx KT9 or whatever, same hand without diamond king? I sure would.

[jkdood]

SKIP