Can you assume anything?

[RMB1]

I think I know the answers to these questions. B)

 

Playing online with a partner who is "Advanced", "Expert" or "Private" and your only agreements are 5cM, strong NT.

 

Is P-1H-2C Drury?

 

Is P-1H-2D-3S Natural?

 

Is (1C)-P-(1S)-1NT Natural?

[Gerben42]

My guesses:

 

1. unfortunately not

2. no

3. unfortunately yes

[jdonn]

I guess no yes no. But I have no clue really.

[gwnn]

you can't assume anything of the three, but with some friends of my friends I assume 2♣ is drury.

[pooltuna]

I think I know the answers to these questions. :)

 

Playing online with a partner who is "Advanced", "Expert" or "Private" and your only agreements are 5cM, strong NT.

 

Is P-1H-2C Drury?

 

Is P-1H-2D-3S Natural?

 

Is (1C)-P-(1S)-1NT Natural?

Q1] Drury what's that? :ph34r:

Q2] yes it is stronger than a 2♠ bid B)

Q3] yes as 2NT would be unusual :)

[Little Kid]

Without agreements I would assume: no, no and yes. I haven't the slightest clue what people on BBO would play it as.

[Bbradley62]

Hopefully you actually agreed to either SAYC or 2/1, to include 5cM and strong NT. Without agreements, I think it's right to default to the BBO SAYC or BBO 2/1 card, both of which say:

no

no

yes

[nige1]

Playing online with a partner who is "Advanced", "Expert" or "Private" and your only agreements are 5cM, strong NT, IMO...

1. P-1♥-2♣ is Drury.
   
2. P-1♥-2♦-3♠ is a splinter (or cue-bid) agreeing diamonds.
   
3. (1♣)-P-(1♠)-1N is Natural 16-19 with stops.
   

[peachy]

1. No. If Drury was not agreed, then this is not Drury.

2. Natural yes, but not forcing natural because 2S is the call for that. So 3S could be either invitational with very long spades, or weak with very long spades. Splinter in competition is useful for their suit only so I doubt that it is splinter even though splinters are so common that I would assume splinters in other situations even without agreement. It is not a cuebid.

3. Yes. If Sandwich NT was not agreed, then this is not Sandwich NT.

 

However, if the discussion was 5cM 15-17NT and all the usual gadgets, then in the "usual gadgets" category I would definitely include Drury, Lebensohl two places, BWS for reverses, 0314, Texas, and so on. But only if I have some evidence that the player is an expert. However, 5cM 15-17 [not 2/1] makes me assume that all undiscussed bids are not what is commonly played, and that they are natural for this player.

[Furlan]

My guesses:

 

1. unfortunately not

2. no

3. unfortunately yes

Ditto.

Would assume splinter for 2.

[matmat]

No drury.

 

shows 55 in the majors

 

nat.

[Siegmund]

I would assume natural, splinter, natural, but be prepared to be wrong about #2. tbh I'd guess on #2 according to how many spades I held myself and whether the opps looked tempted to bid.

[Free]

no no yes, pretty obvious imo.

 

1. not everyone plays drury, so it's not std

2. 2S is reverse and forcing, so 3S is spl

3. sandwich isn't std

[paulg]

1. I would not assume Drury.
   
2. Splinter.
   
3. There are three groups of people in the world:
   1. 
      
   2. those that think 1NT is always natural
      
   3. those who believe 1NT is always sandwich
      
   4. those who appreciate that there is more than one choice
      

Unfortunately group III is the smallest.

[RMB1]

Thanks for all the replies. The most useful was the reference to BBO SAYC.

 

1. I didn't assume Drury which is why I bid a natural 2♦ on 2.

2. I assumed 3♠ agreed ♦ and played in ♦.

3. I knew this was ambiguous but I bid 3NT with ♣AKJxxxx

 

But the auctions are less important. Both partners said they could not play with me any more because we were playing different systems (same message twice in one day). Surely people recognise (after the fact) that many sequences are going to lead to misunderstandings - can't people lighten up a little?

[Hanoi5]

can't people lighten up a little?

Sometimes I think they really can't.

[pooltuna]

can't people lighten up a little?

Sometimes I think they really can't.

I tried but I just talked like Donald Duck and the extra helium wasn't enough to reduce the effect of gravity :D

[dake50]

Saying "advanced" or "expert" in a pick-up partnership is oxymoronic.

The very reason for advanced/expert is PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT.

Is it possible to believe "I'm expert so I don't need to know what WE are meaning"?

[Siegmund]

Both partners said they could not play with me any more because we were playing different systems (same message twice in one day)

 

Well, they were right that you were playing different systems, as evidenced by the fact that they took the bids differently than you intended them :) If they had wanted to, they had the option of having a conversation to agree on a system though... either after or preferably before the accident.

[Finch]

1. I would not assume Drury.
   
2. Splinter.
   
3. There are three groups of people in the world:
   1. 
      
   2. those that think 1NT is always natural
      
   3. those who believe 1NT is always sandwich
      
   4. those who appreciate that there is more than one choice
      

Unfortunately group III is the smallest.

I'm in Group IV:

 

Those who appreciate that there is more than one option

[hotShot]

I'd assume:

no

yes

yes

[peachy]

- can't people lighten up a little?

Indeed :P

Or load a cc.

Or agree that BBO 2/1 or BBO SAYC applies if undiscussed.