32519 Posted January 27, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 Rather than reinvent the wheel...<snip>Check out the hand posted here, and the hand posted here.How does Misiry break the GF when responder can see disaster looming? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zelandakh Posted January 27, 2014 Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 Check out the hand posted here, and the hand posted here.How does Misiry break the GF when responder can see disaster looming?On the first I disagree that your bidding sequence is at all realistic. Opener should surely rebid 4♠ over 4♣ to show very good spades and weaker diamonds, over which Responder gets to choose a contract. I do not know the MisIry system intimately but if 3♦ - 3♥; 4♦ - 5♣ is natural, that would be one way of reaching this. Maybe Ben can step in on that front - I am not even sure if he would consider Opener's hand 3 or 4 losers. I strongly suspect Ben would open the second hand 1♠ rather than 3♣. Of course the North hand is fairly useless in a 1♠ contract but I guess we can live with that when staying so low. If South were to open 3♣ then North would probably play it in 4♥. If you ever find yourself wanting to open with one of these calls and subsequently wondering if you should stop below 3NT in partner's suit then your initial action was almost certainly wrong. As an example, say North passes 3♥ and South holds ♠AQJT98 ♥A ♦- ♣AKQJT9, just wanting to find out about the ♠K and the best trump suit. How would you rate this? It is similar to holding ♠9 ♥ ♦QT53 ♣Q9876432 and hearing partner open 2♣. Would you pass here too? If not then I put it to you that you need to start bidding some of these hands single dummy rather than always seeing the whole deal in advance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mbodell Posted January 27, 2014 Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 I feel like we are near the point where someone should organize a "headsup for rolls" sort of match. Maybe a goulash one where wild distribution is more common, or just one where there are a lot of strong 2 suiters and preempt type hands? :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HighLow21 Posted January 27, 2014 Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 I feel like we are near the point where someone should organize a "headsup for rolls" sort of match. Maybe a goulash one where wild distribution is more common, or just one where there are a lot of strong 2 suiters and preempt type hands? :)Agreed, this would be a good system for goulash, but then again, goulash is a much different game than contract bridge. The frequency of these crazy distributions is so small that any system that tries to incorporate it is likely to do one of two things:(1) Unslot other bid meanings that have much higher frequency (think for example strong vs. weak 2s)(2) Lead to such complexity that when they do occur, there is no effective defense for the other side (or lead to confusion for the partnership that uses the convention once every 10,000 deals). (1) is a much more important problem, in terms of best methods for the partnership. (2) just means that any hands that could use the new system will sometimes lead to problems of their own. Better, I think, to have one opening bid for all powerhouses (2♣) and have an extremely well developed system from that point forward. Out of curiosity -- the original hand has about 2.5 or 3 losers. What is the frequency of 3- loser hands? Has Pavlicek or anyone looked into this? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HighLow21 Posted January 27, 2014 Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 <deleted, duplicate> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
32519 Posted January 28, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2014 May I suggest if you're having to look for them, then it shouldn't be a priority.This post is equally valid for Misiry. With such a low frequency of big 2-suiters just drop the whole thing altogether. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
32519 Posted January 28, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2014 If you ever find yourself wanting to open with one of these calls and subsequently wondering if you should stop below 3NT in partner's suit then your initial action was almost certainly wrong. As an example, say North passes 3♥ and South holds ♠AQJT98 ♥A ♦- ♣AKQJT9, just wanting to find out about the ♠K and the best trump suit. How would you rate this? This can't be right.If the requirements for opening with Misiry are hands as strong as this, then the frequency of occurrence is going to drop even further, to the point of being negligible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
32519 Posted January 28, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2014 Agreed, this would be a good system for goulash, but then again, goulash is a much different game than contract bridge. The frequency of these crazy distributions is so small that any system that tries to incorporate it is likely to do one of two things:(1) Unslot other bid meanings that have much higher frequency (think for example strong vs. weak 2s)(2) Lead to such complexity that when they do occur, there is no effective defense for the other side (or lead to confusion for the partnership that uses the convention once every 10,000 deals). (1) is a much more important problem, in terms of best methods for the partnership. (2) just means that any hands that could use the new system will sometimes lead to problems of their own. Better, I think, to have one opening bid for all powerhouses (2♣) and have an extremely well developed system from that point forward. Out of curiosity -- the original hand has about 2.5 or 3 losers. What is the frequency of 3- loser hands? Has Pavlicek or anyone looked into this?Halleluja! Someone has seen the light! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zelandakh Posted January 28, 2014 Report Share Posted January 28, 2014 If the requirements for opening with Misiry are hands as strong as this, then the frequency of occurrence is going to drop even further, to the point of being negligible.It is not a requirement for either method but the upper end for both is unlimited. That is what makes passing 3♥ risky. If you are excluding stronger hands (to allow for passing the transfer opening) then your frequency will be lower than MisIry. It should also be noted that all MisIry openings include a preempt, which is not true for your 3♥ opening. So the frequency of this is lower than the MisIry openings (3m) handling these hand types. To offset that, the Gambling 3M opening that Ben suggests is also very low frequency. 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.