Lobowolf Posted March 26, 2009 Report Share Posted March 26, 2009 The next director call, btw, comes when the opponents don't find their 8- or 9-card spade fit after you've (gratuitously?) explained that just because he bid 1NT doesn't mean that he doesn't have a spade suit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephen Tu Posted March 26, 2009 Report Share Posted March 26, 2009 All information should be given even if exactly the right question is not asked. That is it is no defense to say "Well he didn't ask about spades?" We are supposed to have enough nous to anticipate the potentially unexpected things in our system that the opponents might need to know. It is not practical to give *all* information. You want to miss the rest of the round any time anyone asks a question? You have to assume the opponent has a certain base of knowledge, you give him information that is peculiar to your partnership, positive inferences about the hand, and *unexpected* negative inferences. What that base of knowledge is obviously depends on the locale. If you have to give all the negative inferences, even those that are expected, common, undiscussed with partner, it is going to be very difficult or even impossible for you to remember them all, let alone explain them all to the opponent before the entire session is over! My position is that in the U.S., the possibility of 4 spades shouldn't be unexpected. In another country where 4cH openings are common, then it is, and I'd agree it should be mentioned without the "right question being asked". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skjaeran Posted March 26, 2009 Report Share Posted March 26, 2009 I don't know if I should view this post as ignorance, arrogance or both. My post was neither ignorant nor arrogant. But your comment was certainly inappropriate (I was going to use a stronger word more like the ones that you chose, but I refrained). The rest of your post was a reasoned argument, with which I disagree. If by-passing the 4 card spade suit is not part of the partnership agreement, it does not have to be mentioned in any explanation of the partnership agreement. A player is allowed to exercise his judgment in choosing not to bid 98xx of spades over his partner's 1♥ opening. The fact that responder holds 4 spades will be just as much of a surprise to opener as it will be to the opponents. So, no such explanation is necessary. Well, I have to say I disagree with you. Several posters from different countries explained why one, where they play, really have to go into detail about the number of spades a forcing NT could contain. And after those you say that you find most of the later posts silly. It's hard for me to understand how that isn't ignorant or arrogant. What you say about by-passing a 4-card spade when there's no agreement, I have no problem with at all. But that's not what was discussed at that point. If I hurt your feelings in any way, so be it. I don't find my post inappropriate at all, in comparision with what I responded to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
precpj Posted March 26, 2009 Report Share Posted March 26, 2009 glad to see the silimar bidding surface in many many vugraph shows on top level competition; this is another beauty of forcing 1NT : :) when you find a fit and less than 6 total support point 1nt chimes in :angry: If i play Precision holding the weak hand I might even bid 1S - a psyche of course and alertable as " 1S could be a fit on heart very junky hand " The Precision 1H Open is 11-15 HCP 5 cards up>> the 1H 1S 4S sequence is vitually non existent At the tables, I would admire your bidding . Before i go through all replies I would say Rock ON :) Precpj 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.