sceptic Posted December 18, 2004 Report Share Posted December 18, 2004 what is galdiator Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sceptic Posted December 18, 2004 Author Report Share Posted December 18, 2004 gladiator :D) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hrothgar Posted December 18, 2004 Report Share Posted December 18, 2004 Gladiator is an artifical 2♣ response over a 1NT opening2♣ serves as a puppet to 2♦ What's old is new again... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dogsbreath Posted December 20, 2004 Report Share Posted December 20, 2004 hi ..isnt 'gladiater' what Hanibal Lecter says after polishing off a female victim?Rgds Dog :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cf_John0 Posted December 21, 2004 Report Share Posted December 21, 2004 what is galdiator If you mean "gladiator", you could make a reference to Gladiator: http://home.nikocity.de/kwiese/konvent/Glad.htm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Double ! Posted December 30, 2004 Report Share Posted December 30, 2004 GLADIATOR is a structure of response to 1NT opening bids (probably could be used in response to 1NT overcalls) where a response of 2 clubs asks opener to bid 2 diamonds at which point responder passes, bids another suit to play, or makes some other 3+ level bid, the meaning of which to be determined by the partnership. A response of 2 diamonds asks for a 4-card major and is supposed to promise at least game invitational values. Opener denies a 4-card major by bidding 2NT with a minimum, by jumping to 3NT with a hand that accepts the game invitation, or by making some 3-level response, agains the nature of which is a matter of partnership agreement. It is important to establish what follow-up sequences are and are not forcing. What has not been mentioned so far is that this approach means that responses of 2 of a major are also game invitational (otherwise puppet with 2C and correct over 2D). LIke many conventions, this approach has its strengths and its limitations such as showing 2-suited hands. I played it many, many moons ago- we did OK with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Double ! Posted December 30, 2004 Report Share Posted December 30, 2004 OOPS- some might say that Gladiator can be used in response to 2NT openers. Matter of opinion---what else is new? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickToll Posted January 7, 2005 Report Share Posted January 7, 2005 OOPS- some might say that Gladiator can be used in response to 2NT openers. Matter of opinion---what else is new? Your description of Gladiator is great! This treatment was included in the first edition of the Roman Club (50's!), with the only small difference in 1NT-2♥♠ being forcing for one round. In the explanation of why using Gladiator instead of Stayman, Giorgio Belladonna wrote that, facing a strong NT (17-20 in early Roman Club) it seemed better using one negative and three positives at level 2, instead of three negatives and only one positive. Using it over 2NT, I've never heard about. IMHO there is major argument against it: if 3♦ has to be the positive inquiry, primarily searching for a major fit for game, the step we lose against 3♣ is gold. After 3♦ there isn't enough space to distinguish a 5card major from a 4card one in the opening hand, and also responder's 5-4 in the majors can't be properly explored within 3NT. A responding structure based on 5-card Stayman (or Romex Stayman), Jacoby transfers and minor-oriented 3♠ seems to be much more efficient... By the way: this is my first post on this great forum. Cheers everybody! 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.