[Wackojack]

wyman, on 2013-September-04, 17:27, said:

I think he was rhetorically asking philG, which demonstrates that eagles has graduated to I/A

[johnu]

eagles123, on 2013-September-04, 13:57, said:

Also for us 2NT rebid is a game force so sorry to disappoint!

QFT ?!? Curious as to why you play 2NT as forcing?

[mgoetze]

PhilG007, on 2013-September-04, 01:18, said:

The 2NT rebid [...] promised cover in the black suits

Actually, it didn't. Glad we could clear that up for you, that's what this forum is for, after all.

[PhilG007]

Antrax, on 2013-September-04, 03:41, said:

I would also bid an apparently horrendous 2NT. Stoppers are for bottles.

I see you're a hero....hero's usually end up in one place...a place with headstones(!)

[PhilG007]

Zelandakh, on 2013-September-04, 05:06, said:

I guess you do not play 2/1 then; nor Kokish; nor any form of Blackwood. There are plenty of examples around of forcing NT bids.



It does what? What do you rebid with a normal (23)53 19 count with ♣xxx then? This is particularly bad avice given that we are in the N/B forum. A 2NT rebid shows the appropriate range and a (semi-)balanced hand. Punkt. The only realistic possibilties for a rebid on the OP hand within a standard system are 2NT and 3NT. YOu make the decision depending on how precisely the partnership has defined 3NT. The default rebid would be 2NT absent any special sgreements. It does not promise a club stopper.

I'm sorry,but I fundamentally do not agree with your dissertation. I know there are forcing NTs but,Blackwood aside,they are a matter
of partnership agreement. And what about the sequence 1NT-4NT? Are you saying 4NT is forcing? If so,you need to go back to the bridge
classroom.(!)

[PhilG007]

mgoetze, on 2013-September-05, 10:00, said:

Actually, it didn't. Glad we could clear that up for you, that's what this forum is for, after all.

Sorry to disappoint you(actually I'm not) but you haven't "cleared" anything.. If two suits are mentioned
and partner then bids NT's,I expect a guard or at least a partial guard in the unbid suits.


"Any fool can criticise,condemn and complain...and most fools do"
-Benjamin Franklin

[helene_t]

3NT is typically based on a singleton hearts and stoppers in the unbid suits so I think it's a misbid. On a bad day partner has xxxx in hearts and corrects 3NT to 5♦. Of course 3NT has the advantage that opps often lead a heart.

2NT describes the hand reasonably well and since it's apparently forcing it will always lead to 3NT. We might not have a club stopper and rebidding 3♦ might in that case lead to a better contract, but there are many disadvantages of 3♦:
- partner might pass it when 3NT is cold
- partner might rebid 3♥ in which case we still don't know what to do to. We could bid 3♠ but that could lead to 3nt in the wrong hand.
- even if we identify the lack of a club stopper and end up in 4♥ in a 5-2 fit there is no guarantee that 4♥ is better than 3NT. If p has xxx of clubs and clubs are 3-3, 3NT is better.

[PhilG007]

Wackojack, on 2013-September-04, 16:19, said:

2NT just the same. If you have 3♣ check-back bid in your tool kit, then you can find a 5-3 heart fit if there is one.

But what if you don't have 3♣ check-back in your "toolkit"? What then?

[PhilG007]

Mbodell, on 2013-September-02, 10:23, said:

I think this is a fine call, not crazy. 6322 are semi-balanced and no trump isn't a bad spot.

6-3-3-2 is not "semi-balanced" at all. It is fundamentally "unbalanced" Much like the reasoning
behind some of the postings here on this thread.(!) And to go into NTs on such a distribution is to
enter Tiger Country.

[helene_t]

PhilG007, on 2013-September-09, 04:10, said:

But what if you don't have 3♣ check-back in your "toolkit"? What then?

In that case responder just rebids his 5-card hearts. Whatever method you play you surely have a way to find a 5-3 fit.

[ArtK78]

PhilG007, on 2013-September-09, 04:19, said:

6-3-3-2 is not "semi-balanced" at all. It is fundamentally "unbalanced" Much like the reasoning
behind some of the postings here on this thread.(!) And to go into NTs on such a distribution is to
enter Tiger Country.

Would 6-3-3-3 be semi-balanced? It only increases the number of cards from 14 to 15.

I assume that you meant 6-3-2-2. And yes, it is semi-balanced, in that it has no singletons or voids. Even 7-2-2-2 is "semi-balanced," but that stretches the term "balanced" a little too far.

[eagles123]

PhilG007 you never answered my question:

Quote

Hi, thanks for your comments, just wondering how you would bid if say one of the low diamonds became a low heart? I wouldn't have cover in the black suits then either? Also for us 2NT rebid is a game force so sorry to disappoint!

Thanks,

Eagles

[Zelandakh]

PhilG007, on 2013-September-09, 03:18, said:

I'm sorry,but I fundamentally do not agree with your dissertation. I know there are forcing NTs but,Blackwood aside,they are a matter
of partnership agreement. And what about the sequence 1NT-4NT? Are you saying 4NT is forcing? If so,you need to go back to the bridge
classroom.(!)

You claimed that:

PhilG007, on 2013-September-04, 01:22, said:

2NT is not forcing,no NT bid ever is.

That means that a single counter-example is enough to show your statement to be false. I did not claim that every NT bid is forcing so a single counter-example is not a disproof of anything. Whether any bid is forcing or not is a matter of partnership agreement. If you agree that a response always promises 6+hcp and a 2NT rebid promises 19+ then it seems perfectly reasonable to play it as forcing. The same as the 13-15 2NT response in SAYC is forcing. The fact that it is also a limit bid is neither here nor there.

As it happens, I do play the sequence 1NT - 4NT as forcing by choice, albeit not with a pick-up partner. I use it as a (Texas-style) transfer to clubs. Obviously that is also a matter of agreement.

However, much of what you are spouting here is extremely misleading within the N/B forum. I would be happy to let it go in another foum but not here. When Opener makes a natural NT opening or rebid, they are showing their shape and strength. It does not promise stoppers in the unbid suits. A very long time ago, some experts did think that opening or rebidding NT in this was required stoppers. Only very poor players bid this way now and it is not something that should be recommended to newer players.

As an aside, semi-balanced is typically a reference to 5422 and 6322 shapes; sometimes others slip in there too such as hands with a singleton ace or king.

And a gentle word of advice. Most of the contributors on BBF are very experienced and know what they are talking about. If you find that you are pushing a lone furrow then you might stop and take a moment's pause to consider your own position. Not always - there are original ideas here too - but for the most part it means that a poster has missed something. Many new posters go through a phase where they aggressively post along the lines of "my way or the high way". Most of us have seen this time and again and will just let you burn yourself out. However, a few posters here will not be so polite when you write rubbish. Take this is a warning that such a confrontation is likely to come sooner rather than later if you continue posting in this style.

And now - back to Tiger Country.

[billw55]

PhilG007, on 2013-September-09, 04:19, said:

6-3-3-2 is not "semi-balanced" at all. It is fundamentally "unbalanced" Much like the reasoning
behind some of the postings here on this thread.(!) And to go into NTs on such a distribution is to
enter Tiger Country.

It is certainly true, that by bidding NT with this hand, that you will sometimes go down on a club lead. That will be a minority of the time though, for reasons:

they won't always lead a club - in fact on this hand and auction, there is every reason to expect a spade.
partner may have a club stopper
clubs may break evenly so they can't cash enough tricks
clubs may be blocked
a defender might switch even when they can run the suit (getting pretty unlikely here, but who has not seen it happen?)

Bridge is not a game of certainty, and bidding only contracts that are completely safe. You go with the odds, and you come out ahead in the long run, but not on every hand.

[mgoetze]

PhilG007, on 2013-September-09, 03:26, said:

Sorry to disappoint you(actually I'm not) but you haven't "cleared" anything.. If two suits are mentioned
and partner then bids NT's,I expect a guard or at least a partial guard in the unbid suits.

What I was saying was that your expectation is misguided and 2NT should not actually promise such guards. Fortunately Zelandakah has already stated quite eloquently everything else I may have wanted to say, so I shall simply concur with him in every regard.

[PhilG007]

helene_t, on 2013-September-09, 04:24, said:

In that case responder just rebids his 5-card hearts. Whatever method you play you surely have a way to find a 5-3 fit.

If you play 5 card majors,then a rebid of the suit promises 6+ cards. There MAY be a case for rebidding a 5 Card suit if it's
powerful e.g AKQJx or AKQ10x but rebidding on xxxxx is a definite no-no.

[PhilG007]

mgoetze, on 2013-September-09, 09:51, said:

What I was saying was that your expectation is misguided and 2NT should not actually promise such guards. Fortunately Zelandakah has already stated quite eloquently everything else I may have wanted to say, so I shall simply concur with him in every regard.

The blind leading the blind(!)

[helene_t]

PhilG007, on 2013-September-11, 04:13, said:

If you play 5 card majors,then a rebid of the suit promises 6+ cards. There MAY be a case for rebidding a 5 Card suit if it's
powerful e.g AKQJx or AKQ10x but rebidding on xxxxx is a definite no-no.

Huh? I thought we were talking about
1♦-1♥
2NT-3♥*

This is normally forcing and shows 5+ hearts. Opener raises with 3-card support (or bids a 4-card spade suit first and then corrects 3NT to 4♥).

Whether you play 5-card majors or not is immaterial. But of course, if you play NMF or something similar you can agree to play 3♥ as non-forcing.

[PhilG007]

billw55, on 2013-September-09, 06:59, said:

It is certainly true, that by bidding NT with this hand, that you will sometimes go down on a club lead. That will be a minority of the time though, for reasons:

they won't always lead a club - in fact on this hand and auction, there is every reason to expect a spade.
partner may have a club stopper
clubs may break evenly so they can't cash enough tricks
clubs may be blocked
a defender might switch even when they can run the suit (getting pretty unlikely here, but who has not seen it happen?)

Bridge is not a game of certainty, and bidding only contracts that are completely safe. You go with the odds, and you come out ahead in the long run, but not on every hand.

Q What is the difference between an amateur and a professional?
A An amateur practices until they get it right. A professional practices until they NEVER GET IT WRONG
(There is also a big gulf in the way the two think)

[PhilG007]

Zelandakh, on 2013-September-09, 06:56, said:

You claimed that:

That means that a single counter-example is enough to show your statement to be false. I did not claim that every NT bid is forcing so a single counter-example is not a disproof of anything. Whether any bid is forcing or not is a matter of partnership agreement. If you agree that a response always promises 6+hcp and a 2NT rebid promises 19+ then it seems perfectly reasonable to play it as forcing. The same as the 13-15 2NT response in SAYC is forcing. The fact that it is also a limit bid is neither here nor there.

As it happens, I do play the sequence 1NT - 4NT as forcing by choice, albeit not with a pick-up partner. I use it as a (Texas-style) transfer to clubs. Obviously that is also a matter of agreement.

However, much of what you are spouting here is extremely misleading within the N/B forum. I would be happy to let it go in another foum but not here. When Opener makes a natural NT opening or rebid, they are showing their shape and strength. It does not promise stoppers in the unbid suits. A very long time ago, some experts did think that opening or rebidding NT in this was required stoppers. Only very poor players bid this way now and it is not something that should be recommended to newer players.

As an aside, semi-balanced is typically a reference to 5422 and 6322 shapes; sometimes others slip in there too such as hands with a singleton ace or king.

And a gentle word of advice. Most of the contributors on BBF are very experienced and know what they are talking about. If you find that you are pushing a lone furrow then you might stop and take a moment's pause to consider your own position. Not always - there are original ideas here too - but for the most part it means that a poster has missed something. Many new posters go through a phase where they aggressively post along the lines of "my way or the high way". Most of us have seen this time and again and will just let you burn yourself out. However, a few posters here will not be so polite when you write rubbish. Take this is a warning that such a confrontation is likely to come sooner rather than later if you continue posting in this style.

And now - back to Tiger Country.

I don't profess to be perfect,unlike some "pontificates" on this forum(!) I have played bridge for 30 years,mostly at an advanced level so that does not make me a wet behind the ears either(!) And a gentle word of advice in return...."Judge not,that ye be not judged" I assume this forum is democratic and open; in that case I have right to my opinion too. You are free to concur or dispute at your leisure. I may not agree with all you post here either...but I will defend to the death your right to say it(!)