Bad MP result, suggestions required

[Fluffy]

Thanks to comments so far.

 

However, I am still puzzled.

I mean, would you bid 3S with North also with the following ?

 

Hand 1

♠ QTxxx

♥ xx

♦ AJx

♣ xxx

 

Instead of the actual hand:

Hand 2

♠ QTxxx

♥ xxx

♦ AJx

♣ xx

 

I have only switched 1 heart with 1 club, yet here 3S is down 1 (200 if doubled)

♥ and ♣ are both uunbid suits, therefore ther is no difference in betweem them at all, partner has the same average holdng on them.

[Fluffy]

1♠ = 0-7

2♠= 8-11 4♠ cards

3♠= 8-11 5♠ cards

If you play that style you can end up in 3s with 5 across from 3 and 8hcp across from 12hcp then. I assume you want to be able to x with 3424 or 3415 shape.

I would alse double with 3325 and 11 HCP

 

Yes I could end up there, and I could make an overtrick.

 

Also I could open 1♣ with 4423 and 13 HCP and get doubled for -2300 vulnerable vs not, but I will still open 1♣.

[Chamaco]

ok, but after a Take out x have no idea why this will be more important to show than other type hands.

Well my idea is that constructive tools are very useful ESPECIALLY when responding to a takeout double because:

 

1- in modern bidding, opponents will often bid a lot with nothing- ESPECIALLY OVER A TO DOUBLE! - and we need to be able to bid close games even when opps get busy; even if responder passes, it is good practice to anticipate competition by a bid that delivers the most info;

 

2- if the doubler can have right away from advancer the info that game is not on (and this is usually delivered by a bid which is weaker than invitational, but also weaker than 9 losers) then we can quickly switch from "constructive" mode to "competitive/preemptive" mode, and jumpraise the auction to the appropriate level.

 

Anyways, I just want to keep well-separated invitational hands from weaker hands.

So, 8 losers hand shoul have a different bid from weaker hands, that's all :-)

 

If then anyone can come up with a tool to further separate 9 losers hand specifically from even weaker hands, while still keeping the stronger hand well-defined, even better !

[Free]

1♠ is just fine. But after the support from partner, North should bid 3♠ because he knows about the extra length.

[Chamaco]

"mixed raise

 

Ok, here I assume you mean the 8/9 loser hand. If it has a five card major, I jump to two of the major. This is always 10 points or less.

 

Limit raise

 

....

Ben, I had thought of such scheme.

 

Bit how do you handle sequences 1S-X-p ?

 

In this case, there is no jump available to the 2-level, and with H you can only jump at the 3 level.

 

I actually had toyed with the idea of transfer advances to t/o doubles, allowing for more discrimination, and I am sure there must be already something out there.

If anyone has any refs, please post them at:

 

http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?sho...view=getnewpost

 

that could save me some search time :-)

[mr1303]

In one partnership we play that X = good take out (15+) and 1NT = bad take-out, so we can play mini-Lebensohl (with 4333 and a 7 count we can pass and beat them on power.

[Chamaco]

In one partnership we play that X = good take out (15+) and 1NT = bad take-out, so we can play mini-Lebensohl (with 4333 and a 7 count we can pass and beat them on power.

I use 1NT as Raptor.

[Brandal]

who do you think should have bid 3 ?

In my opinion,North should

[P_Marlowe]

You could add a version of Good-Bad 2 NT (*)

We do play 2NT lebensohl by advancer (responder to t/o dbl).

 

But using artificial 2NT by the doubler is tricky:

 

Issue 1

we play Raptor, so X +NT might be neded for the strong balanced hand ?

Or do u suggest to use Dbl (after opener's rebid) as generic strong hand including the strong balanced and 2NT as artificial?

 

Issue 2

 

even using 2NT by opener as artificial commits to the 3 level opposite a pard who could hold a yarborough.

This is dangerous at red vs white.

 

Hi,

 

using an artificial 2 NT by the doubler would only aply

in the situation, that opener rebids his suit.

 

Now you do not need 2 NT as natural, at least not

for hands in the 15-17 HCP range.

Because if partner is broke, you do not want to play

2 NT, so you could use 2 NT as Lebensohl style.

 

A double should probably be "optional" , prepared to

play the 4-3 fit on the two level, but also looking for a

penalty, so yes the strong balanced hands would use

double.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[Rebound]

It seems pretty straight forward to me. If you do not consider the north hand to be worth a 2♠ bid directly over the double (I do), then surely with a max for the 1♠ bid you must compete to 3♠ if only to tell partner about the extra strength.