AlexJonson Posted April 5, 2011 Report Share Posted April 5, 2011 Yes and No. Let us say that 20 people of the second set bid 7, and only 5 people of the first set did so; this could be caused by a number of factors.a) Perhaps only 5 of the first set knew how to play bridgeb) Perhaps only 5 of the fist set realised they had miscounted their key cards or knew what a key card was.c) Most importantly, perhaps 20 of the second set were triggered by the question you ask to look for some hidden point. So there are quite a few pitfalls in this approach. The other issue is that the hesitation did not convey to the advancer (assuming he did advance) that he had miscounted his keycards. It is what the hesitation conveys, not what the extra time that he had to think conveyed, that is relevant. Unless we believe that the hesitator did so for the purpose of getting his partner to recount - and this does seem a bit far-fetched. This may, or may not, be my only opportunity to agree completely with Lamford. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shevek Posted April 6, 2011 Report Share Posted April 6, 2011 2♣-2♦3♠-4NT5♥-...6NT 2♣ showed a strong balanced hand, or 9 playing tricks, or a GF. The 3♠ identified it as the 9 playing trick type hand. 2♦ was a relay 4NT was RKCB 5♥ showed 2 key cards (no trump queen) 6NT was agreed to be slow. What do you think this suggests?[hv=pc=n&w=sakjt543hkqdkqc75&e=s8762ha84da87ck94&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=2cp2dp3sp4np5hp6nppp]266|200[/hv] 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.