2/1 IMPS GA AKxx QT AKxxxx x

[eagles123]

geez east pass of 3s is crazy. I would raise with the east hand after 2s.

 

raising after 2s would be a mistake, your partner is showing a minimum hand and you have no extras.

[mike777]

raising after 2s would be a mistake, your partner is showing a minimum hand and you have no extras.

 

 

 

no 2s does not promise only a minimum....we strongly disagree here. in any case across from my minimums we have an easy game try...perhaps not the junk you open on ...:)

 

 

If east is forbidden to raise to 3s with this collection then put me down for my option2 bid of 3c.

[miamijd]

That makes sense when you are playing with a partner with which you have an agreement that 3S is forcing.

 

That probably doesn't work so well with a random "expert" in the Main Bridge Club who might not play "all strange bids are forcing".

 

"Standard expert" is that 3S is 98% forcing.

 

Cheers,

mike

[miamijd]

no 2s does not promise only a minimum....we strongly disagree here. in any case across from my minimums we have an easy game try...perhaps not the junk you open on ...:)

 

 

If east is forbidden to raise to 3s with this collection then put me down for my option2 bid of 3c.

 

If 2S doesn't show a minimum (up to a nice 15), then what do you do with a hand like:

 

AKxx

xxx

QJxx

Kx

 

You have no bid. 2s has to show a minumum with (hopefully) 4S.

[MatthiasK]

I don't get this.

 

Suppose you have the East had and partner opens a strong (15-17) 1NT. Wouldn't you at least be tempted to look for a major suit game?

 

In this case, West has shown 15-17 HCPs, a four card spade suit, an unbalanced hand with a diamond suit, and either short hearts or clubs, where either shortness fits your hand well. That is one and a half trick better than when West opens 1NT. Even if 3♠ wouldn't be forcing (not my idea) I would bid 4♠ without blinking, certainly at IMPs.

 

Rik

 

I agree. Passing with the E hand shows bad judgement.

[GrahamJson]

It seems to me that east has an automatic pass if west rebids 2S. He has already shown his hand by doubling. West could hold a balanced 12-14 count, for which 2S is more than enough. For example Kxxx Qx AKxx xxx. West is vastly better than this so is well worth 3C followed by 3S if east bids 3D or 3H.

[Winstonm]

I can understand offering 3S as a choice, as some play it as forcing (good agreement IMO).

But I've never heard of 2S as forcing.

 

With no such special agreements the only options for me are 4S and 3C.

 

I agree with Cherdano and feel pretty strongly that 3C is right. With a 5-loser hand we cannot bid quietly, but we cannot force partner to hold 4S, either, as he was under pressure to show some values. Worst case we end up in 4D on a 6-2.

 

One thing I learned from this game is you cannot force partner to hold specific hands, especially when he is under pressure, so the best bid is the one that does not punish partner for imperfect holdings.

[GrahamJson]

For what it is worth, Marshall Miles in "Competitive Bidding in the 21st Century" gives this as an example of a 2S rebid after 1D-(2C); AJx xxx Kxxx AJx. This is of course an extreme example, but does illustrate that the 2S bid shows minimum values. It is certainly not a reverse, as some other posters have implied.

[Kaitlyn S]

For what it is worth, Marshall Miles in "Competitive Bidding in the 21st Century" gives this as an example of a 2S rebid after 1D-(2C); AJx xxx Kxxx AJx. This is of course an extreme example, but does illustrate that the 2S bid shows minimum values. It is certainly not a reverse, as some other posters have implied.

it's easy to show that 2S being a reverse is silly. This would force opener to bid 2D of 2NT on all minimum hands when responder implies majors.

[GrahamJson]

Having checked a few sources, all seem to agree that a cue bid is the only forcing continuation by opener after a negative double. To play a jump rebid, 3S in the above example, as forcing must surely make a simple rebid have far too wide a range. Incidentally, Miles also mentions that a negative double at the two level should show a minimum of a 9 count, making the east hand above a dead minimum.

[msjennifer]

it's easy to show that 2S being a reverse is silly. This would force opener to bid 2D of 2NT on all minimum hands when responder implies majors.

Whosoever this Marshal is,he is definitely not living in 21st century !On reading all the discussion on this hand he wii certainly refund all those who have purchased his book.It appears that the so called negative doubles are actually " unusual positive " bids.No one has anywhere mentioned as to how many total losers be there or even the number of losers in the major suits based hand.The definition must also extend to single suited ' negative doubles' .Is there a common agreed understanding if responder had bid 2H/S or 3H/S and the same bids after making a negative double?

Unless and until these are worked out not only on HCP limits but also on the losers in the hand and" defined "clearly there are bound to be multiple opinions on the problems posed not only on today's hands but many dissimilar hands in the future too.On today's hand if opener bids 3 Spade how can it be nonforcing? And if somebody says so then is it an invitational bid? What are the requirements for responder to bid 4S if 3S is invitational? Although not very pleasing,3S bid appears to be the only choice left for this hand,

[mycroft]

Marshall Miles. Yeah, never heard of him either. Gave him a SAYC card once, though, and told him he was playing it until he had at least one acceptable CC.

 

Well, almost. It took me until the end of the round to find the SAYC cards, and by the time I got back to the table, they'd written one out. I don't disbelieve that they were, as they said, very free with their explanations, but well, SB.

 

So, no he is not living in the 21st century, but he did for most of it - and was a bridge writer of the top level. Yes, potentially a little idiosyncratic...

 

It is possible - I realize this might be a stretch, but it's true - to use other evaluation methods than Losing Trick Count(*). Especially if you're a world champion who has played more hands of bridge in a year - for 50 years - than I have in my lifetime. LTC is a great idea, especially when it's not the one and only way to evaluate, and leaned on heavily with a fit and discounted without one. I'd value my partner's judgment over any counting method, though, if my partner was in the Hall of Fame. Of course, if he told me to evaluate with a standard counting method so he could judge properly, I'd be all for it!

 

Also, I assume the auction in question is after 1♦-(2♣)-X-(p).

 

(*) Note applies to HCP, Total Tricks, Zar, K/R, ...

[MrAce]

Whosoever this Marshal is,he is definitely not living in 21st century !On reading all the discussion on this hand he wii certainly refund all those who have purchased his book.It appears that the so called negative doubles are actually " unusual positive " bids.No one has anywhere mentioned as to how many total losers be there or even the number of losers in the major suits based hand.The definition must also extend to single suited ' negative doubles' .Is there a common agreed understanding if responder had bid 2H/S or 3H/S and the same bids after making a negative double?

 

 

 

There are 4 types of posters here, and people in life too.

 

1-those who don't know that they don't know;

2-those who know that they don't know;

3-those who don't know that they know;

4-and those who know that they know.

They all have their own annoying effects to some degree but among them the people in 1st group are the ones who embarrasses themselves the most!

 

Marshall Miles. R.I.P, was a bridge player whose knowledge in his little toe is something you will never achieve in your entire life. But you do not know that either, because someone taught you LTC instead of bridge and you are living the dream that you solved it all!

[eagles123]

I have one of Marshall Miles books - I don't particularly like it, seemed a lot of "this is what you should bid" and lo and behold partner has the perfecto to match the suggested bid. I'm sure he was a great player I just wasn't a huge fan of the book of his I read.

[eagles123]

ps i made a poll on bridge winners for whether 3s is forcing or not: http://bridgewinners.com/article/view/forcing-or-not-2-mnikbh3y2q/

[Joe_Old]

Whosoever this Marshal is,he is definitely not living in 21st century !On reading all the discussion on this hand he wii certainly refund all those who have purchased his book.It appears that the so called negative doubles are actually " unusual positive " bids.No one has anywhere mentioned as to how many total losers be there or even the number of losers in the major suits based hand.The definition must also extend to single suited ' negative doubles' .Is there a common agreed understanding if responder had bid 2H/S or 3H/S and the same bids after making a negative double?

Unless and until these are worked out not only on HCP limits but also on the losers in the hand and" defined "clearly there are bound to be multiple opinions on the problems posed not only on today's hands but many dissimilar hands in the future too.On today's hand if opener bids 3 Spade how can it be nonforcing? And if somebody says so then is it an invitational bid? What are the requirements for responder to bid 4S if 3S is invitational? Although not very pleasing,3S bid appears to be the only choice left for this hand,

 

Marshall Miles was a 5 time NABC+ champion, and is a member of the ACBL Hall of Fame. He died in 2013, and was still a force in major tournaments well into this century.

True, he was considered idiosyncratic and very difficult to partner, but nobody who understands bridge dismisses his opinion lightly.

[iandayre]

Having checked a few sources, all seem to agree that a cue bid is the only forcing continuation by opener after a negative double. To play a jump rebid, 3S in the above example, as forcing must surely make a simple rebid have far too wide a range. Incidentally, Miles also mentions that a negative double at the two level should show a minimum of a 9 count, making the east hand above a dead minimum.

 

Thank you, obviously many here are not familiar with the sources. If you want to agree that the jump is forcing, you may, but it is NOT standard.

[Kaitlyn S]

ps i made a poll on bridge winners for whether 3s is forcing or not: http://bridgewinners...t-2-mnikbh3y2q/

Ha! I got to vote with my unverified account. So far, it's 82 for NF, 6 for forcing.

[m1cha]

What are the requirements for responder to bid 4S if 3S is invitational?

4♠ should not exist since responder did not promise ♠ support. Overcall 3♣ to force to game and let partner bid the lowest 4-card major.

[Kaitlyn S]

4♠ should not exist since responder did not promise ♠ support. Overcall 3♣ to force to game and let partner bid the lowest 4-card major.

You could bid 4S with four spades and tons of diamonds. Or by partnership agreement, it could be 5 spades & 6 diamonds.

[SteveMoe]

4♠ should not exist since responder did not promise ♠ support. Overcall 3♣ to force to game and let partner bid the lowest 4-card major.

 

 

You could bid 4S with four spades and tons of diamonds. Or by partnership agreement, it could be 5 spades & 6 diamonds.

 

Would seem to support that the jump to 3♠ show a 5-card suit. Why waste the space?

[Kaitlyn S]

Would seem to support that the jump to 3♠ show a 5-card suit. Why waste the space?

Because 5-6 isn't that common and 3S is useful to show strength to avoid making 2S too wide range.

[Winstonm]

Because 5-6 isn't that common and 3S is useful to show strength to avoid making 2S too wide range.

 

Not saying it is wrong to bid 3S, but a consideration is that it really boxes partner in when he has a 1-suited heart double, hence, the old style was to use picture bids, even if the holdings described were fairly uncommon.

[Trinidad]

Not saying it is wrong to bid 3S, but a consideration is that it really boxes partner in when he has a 1-suited heart double, hence, the old style was to use picture bids, even if the holdings described were fairly uncommon.

If partner has a one suited heart double, he will (okay, should) have enough values to be able to play game opposite my hand. bacause the negative double means that we can play a contract in 2♦, 2♥, 2♠ or 2NT, opposite a minimum 1♦ opening. We have considerable extras, so we should be able to play in game. This could be in hearts, NT or diamonds.

 

You do not make a negative double on ♠Jx ♥AJxx ♦xx ♣xxxxx. (What would you do after 2♠?)

 

Rik

[mike777]

This thread highlights the dangers of making a negative double on this auction with less than invitational values. Just look at all the different responses and the at the table result of playing 3s making 6. Clearly there are many dangerous hands when making a negative double with less than inv. hands on this auction.

 

Unsaid but my guess is posters find the danger of the opponents stealing from them to be the greater danger, hence the support for the negative double.