Help
all vul
1Nt--(X)---???
KT98x
x
Txxx
xxx
1Nt is 12-14 may have 5M
the sos system is
XX= 2/3 suiter
2y = to play
all further XX is sos meaning that as long as they X you can make partner declarer.
Page 1 of 1
rescue yourself weak NT security vs annoyance
#1
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 3,465
- Joined: 2006-January-07
- Location:Montreal Canada
- Interests:All games. i really mean all of them.
Posted 2011-August-05, 10:39
From Psych "I mean, Gus and I never see eye-to-eye on work stuff.
For instance, he doesn't like being used as a human shield when we're being shot at.
I happen to think it's a very noble way to meet one's maker, especially for a guy like him.
Bottom line is we never let that difference of opinion interfere with anything."
For instance, he doesn't like being used as a human shield when we're being shot at.
I happen to think it's a very noble way to meet one's maker, especially for a guy like him.
Bottom line is we never let that difference of opinion interfere with anything."
#2
- Andy Bowles
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 11,993
- Joined: 2007-May-03
- Gender:Male
- Location:London, UK
Posted 2011-August-05, 10:45
2S. Why should I make it easy for them to exchange information?
... that would still not be conclusive proof, before someone wants to explain that to me as well as if I was a 5 year-old. - gwnn
#3
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 13,346
- Joined: 2005-June-15
- Gender:Male
- Location:Canada
- Interests:Bridge, golf, wine (red), cooking, reading eclectically but insatiably, travelling, making bad posts.
Posted 2011-August-05, 10:53
gnasher, on 2011-August-05, 10:45, said:
2S. Why should I make it easy for them to exchange information?
and let's preempt them.
BTW, I prefer a style in which responder has 2 ways to show a spade 1 suiter (and I consider this a 1-suiter)....bidding directly allows opener to raise with an appropriate hand with 4 card support while redoubling then 2♠ tells opener that we have no interest in competing to the 3-level. There are arguments for and against this, of course. This is a hand on which I would be happy to compete to the 3 level if he felt so inclined (he doesn't do it just because he has 4 trumps).
'one of the great markers of the advance of human kindness is the howls you will hear from the Men of God' Johann Hari
#4
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 796
- Joined: 2010-October-21
- Gender:Male
- Location:Copenhagen, Denmark
Posted 2011-August-05, 11:11
Also 2♠.
I play such a style, but we would need quite some more than this to show a "good" 2♠. Opener is on the other hand allowed to compete on (virtually) all 4 card fits or a good hand with 3.
mikeh, on 2011-August-05, 10:53, said:
BTW, I prefer a style in which responder has 2 ways to show a spade 1 suiter (and I consider this a 1-suiter)....bidding directly allows opener to raise with an appropriate hand with 4 card support while redoubling then 2♠ tells opener that we have no interest in competing to the 3-level. There are arguments for and against this, of course. This is a hand on which I would be happy to compete to the 3 level if he felt so inclined (he doesn't do it just because he has 4 trumps).
I play such a style, but we would need quite some more than this to show a "good" 2♠. Opener is on the other hand allowed to compete on (virtually) all 4 card fits or a good hand with 3.
Michael Askgaard
#5
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 12,029
- Joined: 2009-February-21
- Gender:Male
- Location:St. George, UT
Posted 2011-August-05, 11:37
Given the OP agreements, 2♠ is just right. He didn't ask, but a thread on alternative agreements would be interesting to some people I know who use weak NT.
The comments on two ways to show spades are important in determining whether 2S can be bid, here; but taking up their whole 2-level certainly is a good thing.
The comments on two ways to show spades are important in determining whether 2S can be bid, here; but taking up their whole 2-level certainly is a good thing.
"Bidding Spades to show spades can work well." (Kenberg)
Page 1 of 1