Vampyr Posted July 10, 2017 Report Share Posted July 10, 2017 Fisher-Schwartz played I remember wondering why a top pair would waste useful bidding space by having 1m openings with overlapping meanings, but that was before the cheating allegations against them. Then I realised that the choice of opening with this hand type could be used to send a (binary) signal for nefarious purposes. (I don't mean to suggest they actually did.) LOL it would not be a shock! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nullve Posted July 12, 2017 Report Share Posted July 12, 2017 I heard the word 'baloney' on CNN yesterday, and my immediate association was a bid of 1y showing a balanced hand, as in the following ('Baloney'?) defence to strong a strong club: (1♣)-1y = BAL, i.e., (1♣)-?: 1♦ = BAL1♥ = BAL1♠ = BAL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zelandakh Posted July 12, 2017 Report Share Posted July 12, 2017 I heard the word 'baloney' on CNN yesterday, and my immediate association was a bid of 1y showing a balanced hand,Why not: 1♣ = any unbalanced; 1♦ = 10-12 bal; 1♥ = 13-15 bal; 1♠ = 16-18 bal; 1NT = 19-21 bal? Or something along those lines. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vampyr Posted July 12, 2017 Report Share Posted July 12, 2017 Why not: 1♣ = any unbalanced; 1♦ = 10-12 bal; 1♥ = 13-15 bal; 1♠ = 16-18 bal; 1NT = 19-21 bal? Or something along those lines. 1♣ is insufficient, but maybe you meant double? But with an unbalanced hand you want to bid at least to 2M. Anyway, of course a defence to an artificial opening is not the same as a constructive bid, and the regulations are not the same. For instance, you can assign all your one-and two-level overcalls to the meaning "present at the table" with the choice determined by the second hand on your watch. I am not sure whether it is permitted for instance to respond to your partner's opener with a bid that means "present at the table", although I do know that you can open a strong or multi-type bid with no permitted responses other than the next step. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zelandakh Posted July 12, 2017 Report Share Posted July 12, 2017 1♣ is insufficient, but maybe you meant double?How is an opening bid of 1♣ insufficient? My point was that when confronted by an apparent system/convention name of "balanced 1y", it surely makes more sense to look at opening bids rather than introduce a strong club, and in this case it is obviously better as assigning multiple bids for overcalling on balanced hands to the detriment of unbalanced ones is just illogical within that context. 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.