gwnn Posted February 9, 2012 Report Share Posted February 9, 2012 1NT-2♣-p-2♥p-p-2N what is this? 2♣ was both majors. 2NT in direct seat would be a signoff in a minor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mich-b Posted February 9, 2012 Report Share Posted February 9, 2012 Both minors - shapely and/or weakish.Double here is t/o , but a more balanced hand which is ok with pd passing.2♠ is natural. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjbrr Posted February 9, 2012 Report Share Posted February 9, 2012 both minors. doesn't have to be weakish necessarily Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TWO4BRIDGE Posted February 9, 2012 Report Share Posted February 9, 2012 both minors. doesn't have to be weakish necessarilyIf you play "systems on" over 2C interference, wouldn't you have a bid for the minors immediately ? ( It may be 2S! ). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mich-b Posted February 9, 2012 Report Share Posted February 9, 2012 If you play "systems on" over 2C interference, wouldn't you have a bid for the minors immediately ? ( It may be 2S! ). "Systems on" over a 2♣ showing majors, does not seem optimal. For example a natural 2♦ bid , is surely more important to have than a transfer to hearts. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjbrr Posted February 9, 2012 Report Share Posted February 9, 2012 If you play "systems on" over 2C interference, wouldn't you have a bid for the minors immediately ? ( It may be 2S! ). i'm not necessarily convinced you need a bid to show weak with both minors immediately. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BunnyGo Posted February 9, 2012 Report Share Posted February 9, 2012 If you play "systems on" over 2C interference, wouldn't you have a bid for the minors immediately ? ( It may be 2S! ). I agree with mich-b in that even though I play "systems on" over 2♣ interference, I play systems off when 2♣ is the majors. As for the original question, I too would expect it to be for the minors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted February 9, 2012 Report Share Posted February 9, 2012 Yes, minors. I also think 2♠ is four good spades and a minor, and double is takeout, but tends to be sort of balanced by default. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted February 9, 2012 Report Share Posted February 9, 2012 doublepost Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pooltuna Posted February 9, 2012 Report Share Posted February 9, 2012 I would assume this was MPs and to play Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwnn Posted February 10, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 10, 2012 I would assume this was MPs and to playyou should play with my partner more often :) this is the 'right answer', at least in this particular board. granted, I misplayed 3♣ in a 4-3 fit quite badly for -100 instead of -50 (which you also get for 2NT). My handxx AQJ Axxx A8xx, his hand Axxx xx T9xx Kxx. Ruffing spades would have been a clever way to play it but I discarded one on a heart. dom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenrexford Posted February 10, 2012 Report Share Posted February 10, 2012 Interesting sequence for theoretical reasons. First, I cannot imagine why, if you have a means of showing both minors without interference, you would not have similar methods moreso if 2♣ shows the majors. This would be backwards, IMO. If anything, I could imagine playing flags (unusual versus unusual), or something similar, to have more minor description options. So, let us assume a rational set of agreements where most minor-oriented hands can be shown immediately. If so, then a delayed 2NT as minors has somewhat less utility. You could still play that way, but it seems somewhat anti-percentage. One question, though, is what a double of 2♣ means, systemically. If stating a desire to defend some major (or both), then 2NT is further tailored and perhaps back to minors, perhaps 4-4. If there is no double as penalty option, then perhaps 2NT should show "takeout of hearts," strangely, with at least invitational values. You would have hit 2♠, but now you find yourself somewhat stuck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluecalm Posted February 10, 2012 Report Share Posted February 10, 2012 I would expect most people wanting to play it as minors but I am not sure if just natural to play isn't better option, especially at matchpoints.The more I think about such situations the more I want to get rid of lebensohls, good/bad's 2NT or t/o for minors and just play 2NT natural in as many auctions as possible. 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.