Another Raleigh Hand

[jtfanclub]

I mean, 1♠-P-2♠! "He might have Hx in spades and about a good 9 to bad 11."

Had that discussion with my mentor before...after reading "To bid or Not to bid", I said that if everybody wasn't going to let us play after 1♥-P-2♥-P-P unless it was going to be a bad result, shouldn't we start including hands with 8-10 and Hx support as well as 6-9 and 3 card support?

 

He said, if we found that nobody was letting us play 2♥, he'd certainly consider it.

 

Of course, lots of people happily let us play in 2♥, so we never did add it. Why attempt to confuse the opponents if they were going to be good and let us bid without interference?

 

We did add those hands to 1♥ X 2♥. I forget if we're alone in that or not. (Precision, so the odds of game are remote).

[kenrexford]

Ken if your general argument is that our side misbidding might cause their side to misjudge, I agree. But that's always true. I don't consider it a very good reason to misbid in general.

Not exactly.

 

A raise on Hx support is not a "misbid" unless the call specifically excludes that possibility. If the bid can include that possibility, it is not a misbid. Rather, it is a bid that leaves the opponents without a piece of the puzzle necessary for their decisions to be as reliable.

 

The idea of raising with less than full knowledge of an 8-fit is far from unusual. If I recall correctly, I think 3-card raises were/are advocated in some situations when using 4-card major openings. Equally, we often raise Responder's 4+ suit with a 3-card fragment. Thus, this is not exactly branching out into crazy land.

 

Furthermore, because of the rampant use of Bergen raises, there is a sort of symmetry to this. Whereas 20 years ago a simple raise might have 3-4 cards of support, or even 5, the modern 1-2 raise much less frequently features a 4-fit and almost never a 5-fit. Hence, the utility of the call has in a sense decreased, which has fine-tuned bidding. Expanding it a tad in the other direction, with compensating HCPs, does not seem like a huge leap to explore.

[qwery_hi]

Ken if your general argument is that our side misbidding might cause their side to misjudge, I agree. But that's always true. I don't consider it a very good reason to misbid in general.

Not exactly.

 

A raise on Hx support is not a "misbid" unless the call specifically excludes that possibility. If the bid can include that possibility, it is not a misbid. Rather, it is a bid that leaves the opponents without a piece of the puzzle necessary for their decisions to be as reliable.

 

The idea of raising with less than full knowledge of an 8-fit is far from unusual. If I recall correctly, I think 3-card raises were/are advocated in some situations when using 4-card major openings. Equally, we often raise Responder's 4+ suit with a 3-card fragment. Thus, this is not exactly branching out into crazy land.

 

Furthermore, because of the rampant use of Bergen raises, there is a sort of symmetry to this. Whereas 20 years ago a simple raise might have 3-4 cards of support, or even 5, the modern 1-2 raise much less frequently features a 4-fit and almost never a 5-fit. Hence, the utility of the call has in a sense decreased, which has fine-tuned bidding. Expanding it a tad in the other direction, with compensating HCPs, does not seem like a huge leap to explore.

I think this is worth exploring. I'd like to experiment with playing it and look at my results at MPs.