dead last.

[gwnn]

Kx

xxx

Q9xxxxx

J

 

1♠-(2♣)-?

 

no one vulnerable mps

[lmilne]

pass?

 

or do i need to do something outrageous in order to come dead last?

[hrothgar]

I'd pass (though I briefly entertained a 2♠ bid)

[helene_t]

3♦

[bluecalm]

I play negative free bids in all partnerships so this problem is completely unknown to me.

Do you "standard" players really pass 7carders here ? ;)

[Hanoi5]

I pass but this is the sort of problem where 2♠ gets the highest marks.

[Cyberyeti]

3♦

Fine if this is what it means, but is fit jump for me.

 

Pass.

[gwnn]

3♦ is not available because it's undiscussed.

[pooltuna]

Kx

xxx

Q9xxxxx

J

 

1♠-(2♣)-?

 

no one vulnerable mps

am I out of green cards and have to use something else from my bidding box?

[pooltuna]

I play negative free bids in all partnerships so this problem is completely unknown to me.

Do you "standard" players really pass 7carders here ? :)

yes we do

[Rossoneri]

Pass.

[vuroth]

3♦ or pass, depending on methods.

[Phil]

I play negative free bids in all partnerships so this problem is completely unknown to me.

Do you "standard" players really pass 7carders here ? :)

Yes we do, but we also get to show our five or six card diamond suit at the two level when we have a 12 count, instead of guessing over 5♣ when the tray comes back after we have made a meaningless negative double.

[bluecalm]

Yes we do, but we also get to show our five or six card diamond suit at the two level when we have a 12 count, instead of guessing over 5♣ when the tray comes back after we have made a meaningless negative double.

 

Standard when playing NFB's is playing 3♦ as natural, game forcing without 4 of other major so it's not like you hide 6♦ in any sequence.

Anyway discussion about NFB's probably won't be too fruitful. If I somehow were to play standard I would insist on playing jumps as weak and natural so I could bid 3♦ with this hand.

 

One thing I refuse to do is bidding 2♠. There are positions where raising with Hx is both safe and profitable but this is not one of them as risk of partner misevaluating strength of our combined resources is too big.

[whereagles]

Pass. Maybe 2♠ if pard is used to this style of bids :)

[Cascade]

Playing a method where you have to pass with a bunch of tricks and a secondary fit for partner seems inferior.

 

This is a normal 2♦ for me.

[MFA]

3♦ if available, otherwise I'll have to pass (and pray).

[bluecalm]

Playing a method where you have to pass with a bunch of tricks and a secondary fit for partner seems inferior.

 

I believe that the USA currently hold only the World Championship For People Who Still Bid Like Your Auntie Gladys

 

Yeah...

[gwnn]

bluecalm I'm afraid you misunderstand the dburn quote. He was saying that there are too many restrictions in the Bermuda Bowl. He was not saying that American systems are somehow inferior.

[Fluffy]

I'd bid 2♦, if that's forcing then i'd try 3♦, if its undiscussed then I'd pass

[WellSpyder]

I'm interested to see that no-one has discussed the possibility of doubling and then bidding 3♦. Don't people who play 2♦ as forcing use this as a way of showing a hand too weak to bid 2♦? Or do people simply think it is not worth committing to playing at the 3 level if you can't do that immediately to jam the opponents' auction?

[gwnn]

Because double shows 4+ hearts.

[bluecalm]

bluecalm I'm afraid you misunderstand the dburn quote

 

Yes, right. It was unsuccessful attempt to make fun of US bidding methods. I succeeded at making myself look like an idiot though :lol:

 

I'm interested to see that no-one has discussed the possibility of doubling and then bidding 3♦

 

I think some of them do but standard (and imo better) way to play is that it promises 4 of other major.

NFB bidders are not immune to this problem. They have it at 3 level (cause most people don't play NFBs at 3 level), for example:

 

1♠ - 2♦ - ? xx xxx Ax KQxxxx

 

Somehow those hands are rare and having dbl promising 4 of oM is much more practical.