Trying to be more flexiable

[Flame]

I am trying to be more flexiable , my model for flexibility is Hrotqar.

Today i tried it twice, but i think i went too far, how bad was I ?

1.

all vul

the bidding goes

(1S) p (1NT)

and i hold

----

10xxx

J10x

AQ10xxx

I bid 2C now.

2. non vul against vul

1S (D)

I hold

72

Kxx

K10xx

xxxx

I bid 2sp

[inquiry]

I am a little worried about the first hand, and a lot worried about the second. Let's being with the first. Where are all the spades? You have NONE.... and RHO didn't support. True, WEST could have lots and lots of spades, but I wouldn't be terribly surprised if partner had 5 spades. This hand has a great chance to be a big misfit. However, I don't object 2♣;s.

 

Board 2,on the other hand. There is nothing to favor a 2♠ bid. You don't want to encourage a spade lead particularily. Bow, assuming you play 2♥ here as a good raise to 2♠. then 2♠ as a weak riase is just about right on stregnth. The second problem with 2♠ is partner my not be in on the joke and bid one more of them gettingtoo high.

 

So I will go tiwh 2♣ even vul on one, but I will disagree with 2♠ on two.

 

Ben

[1eyedjack]

Raising on a potential 7 card fit has the greatest opportunity for gain and the least risk when you do it before the opponents have got together in the auction to determine for themselves their combined values and the likelihood of a fit.

 

In Moscito, for example 1H-2S uncontested would be freely bid with only 3 card support for a possible 4 card suit. However the opponents are totally in the dark, and this adds to its effectiveness. The pressure is magnified by the fact that opener is roughly equally likely to have 4 card Spade suit as he is to have 5, and the risk of disaster is minimised by the limited values placed on opener.

 

Contrast after Double of 1S opener, and you are considering raising on doubleton in what appears likely to be a misfit: The likelihood of opener having a 6th Spade is rather reduced, and the double shows features both in terms of strength and shape of the doubler, so they are less in the dark, whilst an unlimited opener may get over-excited.

 

Just my observation. Hrothgar may override - he plays these methods more than I.

[flytoox]

I think you did go too far. First hand there is no fit, pd looks have long spade. Furtheremore, opener may have a very strong hand. Better wait and see. If opener rebid 2s and all pass to you, then try reopen with a dbl.

 

The second one you just tried too hard to compete. Raising pd is always a good thing but this time pd wont be happy.

 

Hongjun

[Chamaco]

I believe flexibility is a great virtue, as long as pard knows what to expect.

 

I know some people who do not like to support pard's suit even with xxx, they require in most situations Hxx, and they will be happier of Kx support rather than 862.

Others will always support holding 432.

 

Some will treat the support as an invitation to take a sacrifice or compete ad won't be happy of a doubleton support. Others will stop in time.

Etc etc.

 

(Just a note here to clarify I do not refer to world class nor to beginners/improving players:

the players I mentioned here regularly score every year in the top 30/40 pairs at the italian championships, so that they are not world class but no palookas either.

 

So I'd dare to say that this picture is representative of a legitimate part of real world bridge- regardless of whether we like or not such styles.)

So I gues the bottomline is that non-standard evaluations should take into account the probable partner's subsequent actions (and reactions :rolleyes: ).

[BritTim]

In both these cases, it depends a little on what partner will expect. Take the 2♣ bid first. It is only risky if partner will expect a stronger hand. It will be rare that opponents could severely penalise you in 2♣. If partner knows you are prone to such bids, then once in a while it allows you to compete effectively. Of course, you may then be unable to get across your strength on those rare occasions when you really have the goods.

 

On the 2♠ bid, if partner knows you would always push to the 3-level with 4 trumps and sometimes raise to 2♠ with a doubleton, then the bid is a little unsound but an interesting pressure bid. The trouble is that, if partner knows these things, you ought to announce them to opponents also (and that reduces the chance of opponents misjudging the position). As in many competitive situations, psychology has a part to play here. Persuading opponents to compete to the 3-level when your hand is primarily defensive will often be a gain of 5 IMPs.

 

Neither of these bids is really my style, but I try to keep an open mind and would not castigate my partners for trying them.

[luke warm]

on hand 1 i'd bid 2C... on hand 2 i'd pass... lho is pretty much forced and my defense isn't bad... let's wait

[mikestar]

The second hand is perfect for CAPP/1MX, which uses 1N forcing and transfers over a double. Here you could bid 1N then rebid 2S, showing some values and doubleton support.

 

Of course, anything that clarifies the trump positon for you clarifies it for them too. The direct raise on a doubleton can give the enemy fits even though you alert and explain. If you are on a 5-2 fit it is probably a mistake for them to compete, if a 5-3 it is a mistake for them to pass. You lose when partner can't take the push with 6 trumps. Against that, you gain when he has 6 trumps and they let you play 2S.

 

I rather like the ambiguity--I feel it hurts them worse than us. I feel even more strongly that the 3 card raise of a four card major opening is a winner. The same competitve considerations apply, and 4-3's usually play better than 5-2's.

[Flame]

4-3's usually play better than 5-2's.

I think you are wrong here.

5-2 are usually better then 4-3, on a bidding like

1S-1NT-2H

many people would correct partner to 2sp with 3 hearts and 2 spades, even tho there is a chance partner has 5-5 this is because they know most of the time 5-2 will be better then 4-3.

The resson supporting a 4 card opening with a 3 cards works well is because an opening of 4 card will many times have 5 cards, especially in major, waiting for 4 cards will get you a bad result.

[hrothgar]

Hmmm. I am rarely considered to be particularly flexible.

With this said and done, I might as well clarify a bit about my bidding style.

 

The bidding structures that I prefer combine three key elements

 

1. I prefered "disciplined" styles in which players have systemic methods available to describe their hands.

 

2. I prefer to optimize bidding structures arround the common hand types at the expense of less frequent hands. Accordingly, I spend a lot of time trying to optimize the opening structure, basic response strucutres, and direct overcall strucutres.

 

3. I prefer systems designed to place as much pressure as possible on the opponents. More specifically, I prefer to blast ASAP to ac ceptable contracts at the expensive of missing an optimal contract.

 

On to the hands...

 

I'm willing to play VERY aggressive opening structures, because I belive in striking the first blow. However, I tend to be much more conservative once the opponents have had the chance to clarify their hands. Interference at this point in time is much more risky. If the opponents have already denied a fit, its also mcuh more dnagerous.

 

With hand 1: I don't object to 2♣, since it has some lead directing values.

 

With ahnd 2: I prefer 1NT to 2♠. Holding Ax or Kx, I'd probably consider the raise, since I want partner to be able to lead a spade. On this hand, I lean towards 1NT. I want to be able to show some values, while denying a fit. Ideally, we'll be able to double the opps....