gwnn Posted October 3, 2008 Report Share Posted October 3, 2008 Fred are you saying that this stop showing/denying idea is bad after a 2 suiter or bad in general? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fred Posted October 3, 2008 Report Share Posted October 3, 2008 Fred are you saying that this stop showing/denying idea is bad after a 2 suiter or bad in general? Bad idea when the overcall shows a 2-suiter. Good idea when the overcall shows a 1-suiter. Fred GitelmanBridge Base Inc.www.bridgebase.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pclayton Posted October 3, 2008 Report Share Posted October 3, 2008 -- I would assume 2N-->3♣--> 3N would show 'doubt' in these methods. Something like: xxx xxx AKx KQxx. Isn't this the time that we are worried about responder taking a call over 2N when opener has both majors stopped? No - this is a hand where you want to play 3NT. Same goes if your AKx was in one of the majors instead of diamonds. The reason is that you have more to gain (the game bonus) when you are right than you have to lose (an undertrick or two) when you are wrong, especially since you are unlikely to have a game bonus available in 5 of a minor. Dare your RHO find the winning lead (if there is one) on his own. Dare your LHO to bid 4 of a major - you will be happy to Double him. This is a poker situation, not a bridge situation. Practice trumps theory and, in my experience, the "undefined" 3NT is a big winner in practice. Fred GitelmanBridge Base Inc.www.bridgebase.com Then use xx xx AKxx KQxxx. I don't care. I'm sure there's a hand where you will stop playing poker and start playing bridge :P. Certainly 2N--> 3C--> 3N means something for you and Brad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fred Posted October 3, 2008 Report Share Posted October 3, 2008 Then use xx xx AKxx KQxxx. I don't care. I'm sure there's a hand where you will stop playing poker and start playing bridge :P. Certainly 2N--> 3C--> 3N means something for you and Brad. True, but it has nothing to do with stoppers. We don't play Lebensohl or any other stopper showing/denying mechanism when the opponents have shown a 2-suiter. Fred GitelmanBridge Base Inc.www.bridgebase.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Echognome Posted October 3, 2008 Author Report Share Posted October 3, 2008 I guess this thread gives good evidence for Mike Fladder's ruling being wrong. Was really the only poll I could think of to figure out a sensible way to judge the situation. I will go further to disagree with Flader's ruling on the basis that in order to rule "result stands" you are basically saying that South would pass 3NT given the correct information! I think that was just a poor ruling. This poll was actually made to address one of our posters who said he would rule that South had "failed to play bridge" when he passed 3NT with the given explanation. I thought it extremely harsh to rule that when it seemed obvious to me that South was confused as to their agreements. 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.