ATB

[bucky]

But in his framework, 2♣ is not a psychic control bid, and 2♠ doesn't say "I psyched."

 

I mean, if ALL LR+ hands have to go through 2♣, then you have a point. But I assume there exists hands that would do fit-showing or splinter, so 2♣ is not the only way to show good raise, therefore it cannot be used for psychic control.

[Cascade]

But in his framework, 2♣ is not a psychic control bid, and 2♠ doesn't say "I psyched."

 

I mean, if ALL LR+ hands have to go through 2♣, then you have a point. But I assume there exists hands that would do fit-showing or splinter, so 2♣ is not the only way to show good raise, therefore it cannot be used for psychic control.

 

I don't think that is the way the regulation reads.

 

2♣ Drury is a partnership agreement that if used in conjunction with a psychic bid makes allowance for the psychic bid.

 

If 2♣ Drury is ever used that way - intentionally or not - then it appears to meet the definition of "psychic control".

[bucky]

I don't think that is the way the regulation reads.

 

2♣ Drury is a partnership agreement that if used in conjunction with a psychic bid makes allowance for the psychic bid.

 

If 2♣ Drury is ever used that way - intentionally or not - then it appears to meet the definition of "psychic control".

I think that is absurd. 2♠ is drop-dead only because responder failed to jump for fit-showing or splinter, so the negative inference is enough for the opener to not want to try for game versus a passed hand. In SAYC, 1♠ - 1NT - 2♠ is pretty much drop-dead too, does it make 1NT a psychic control bid?

[Cascade]

I think that is absurd. 2♠ is drop-dead only because responder failed to jump for fit-showing or splinter, so the negative inference is enough for the opener to not want to try for game versus a passed hand. In SAYC, 1♠ - 1NT - 2♠ is pretty much drop-dead too, does it make 1NT a psychic control bid?

 

I think there is a significant difference between a weak response of 1NT and an otherwise invitational response of 2♣.

 

1NT tells partner that you have a few points and that opener will need extras to warrant a contract higher than the two level.

 

2♣ is asking partner if he has a minimum or sub-minimum opening. If you do not open sub-minimum hands there is no problem. If you do open sub-minimum hands to the extent that they are psychic then your 2♣ response and the "drop dead" reply are effectively controlling the psychic.

[mikeh]

I have little idea about Mike's psyching tendancies but if this method is used in conjunction with a psychic 3rd seat opening then it seems that the method is illegal.

I used to psyche frequently, now rarely and I certainly did not mean that 2♠ is psyche revealing. maybe I used overly strong language, but what I intended by 'drop dead' is that I have the type of hand that has zero game interest opposite a non-splinter/non fit-jump limit raise. I truly hate partners who, having passed in 1st or 2nd (especially 1st) drive to the 3 level after I have won the board by opening light, often with a chunky 4-bagger, turning a good result into a bad, and then saying 'I had 11 hcp with 4 card support, partner'...which isn't that great since that describes my hand as well.

 

I also tend not to use methods that are illegal.

[bid_em_up]

.

[gordontd]

Assuming 2♣ is drury, then 2♦ has to be artificial. It is not playable to use 2♦ as natural in conjunction with the drury convention.

Of course it is. 2M is a (sub)minimum rebid, and everything else is natural with at least full opening values. How is that not playable?

[bucky]

Of course it is. 2M is a (sub)minimum rebid, and everything else is natural with at least full opening values. How is that not playable?

Then you cannot stop at 2M for many hands.