BBO Discussion Forums: Your rebid with good 2=1=4=6 - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Your rebid with good 2=1=4=6

#21 User is offline   PhantomSac 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,488
  • Joined: 2006-March-23
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2015-June-27, 16:30

he is lol because you said you doubt you could find anyone who played 1C 1S X p 2D as forcing, so he posted a link that contained 6 links to threads discussing whether or not 2D is NF in that auction. It is one of the most asked about auctions of all time on this forum, with a large majority of the top players here IIRC preferring forcing.
The artist formerly known as jlall
0

#22 User is offline   Vampyr 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,611
  • Joined: 2009-September-15
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:London

Posted 2015-June-27, 17:38

 MrAce, on 2015-June-26, 19:24, said:

They are all either very good players or pros,

Jill Meyers
Fred Hamilton
Lee may be Roger Lee (just guessing)
Bart Bramley

Their achievements are beyond district level, some of them represented USA in various world wide events and won. I know Jill did, I know Bart won so many nationals and by nationals i do not mean LM pairs or GNT. They won main events such as Blue Ribbon, Reisinger, Vandy, Spingold.

I personally like 3 being forcing.


Well, Lee, Lawrence, Hamilton and someone whose name I couldn't read bid 3.
I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones -- Albert Einstein
0

#23 User is offline   MrAce 

  • VIP Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,971
  • Joined: 2009-November-14
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Houston, TX

Posted 2015-June-27, 20:09

 Vampyr, on 2015-June-27, 17:38, said:

Well, Lee, Lawrence, Hamilton and someone whose name I couldn't read bid 3.


No, not Hamilton.

Hamilton bid 3 and said maybe 4

Lawrence bids 3 and J.S (John Swanson, also another player with a lot of credentials) debates that 3 should not be forcing but a hand with good playing hand. He also says a hand can be offering 3 NT. Constructs a hand

xx
A
AQxx
KJxxxx
"Genius has its own limitations, however stupidity has no such boundaries!"
"It's only when a mosquito lands on your testicles that you realize there is always a way to solve problems without using violence!"

"Well to be perfectly honest, in my humble opinion, of course without offending anyone who thinks differently from my point of view, but also by looking into this matter in a different perspective and without being condemning of one's view's and by trying to make it objectified, and by considering each and every one's valid opinion, I honestly believe that I completely forgot what I was going to say."





0

#24 User is offline   Vampyr 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,611
  • Joined: 2009-September-15
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:London

Posted 2015-June-27, 23:29

OK, I couldn't really read the names and definitely couldn't read the comments.

I recently played in 3 +2 when partner didn't think 3 was forcing on this auction, and I did. I thought it was logical for it to be forcing at least to 4 (or 3NT obv), since that is what partner would have to bid to take a preference back to clubs. (Of course this doesn't apply if you play that doubles promises diamonds).

Phil King was on hand, and we asked his opinion; he said as he does above that it was better to play it as forcing. We believed him and still do.

A question that gets asked a lot in threads of this nature is "how small a target are you aiming for?" I do not think that stopping in 3 and knowing that it's right is very important (and it could still happen after I double) compared to getting to the right game when I have a good hand.
I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones -- Albert Einstein
0

#25 User is offline   gwnn 

  • Csaba the Hutt
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 13,027
  • Joined: 2006-June-16
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:bye

Posted 2015-June-28, 01:04

 gszes, on 2015-June-27, 16:17, said:

I am unsure if you are lol because my statement was so completely obvious it was not worth mentioning or because i was completely oblivious to the above reference that agrees with my statement Or you wanted to play devil's advocate and show at least one in disagreement.

Maybe next time you can click on the link and find out, huh? But yes PhantomSac already said what I meant.
... and I can prove it with my usual, flawless logic.
      George Carlin
0

#26 User is offline   KurtGodel 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 223
  • Joined: 2012-June-26

Posted 2015-June-28, 06:18

 mikeh, on 2015-June-26, 17:48, said:

You are never going to go broke by underestimating the bridge knowledge of most club level players.

This is gold.
0

#27 User is offline   rhm 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,092
  • Joined: 2005-June-27

Posted 2015-June-28, 06:46

 Vampyr, on 2015-June-27, 23:29, said:

I do not think that stopping in 3 and knowing that it's right is very important (and it could still happen after I double) compared to getting to the right game when I have a good hand.

As usual you completely miss the point.
You have no clue what the discussion is all about.

Rainer Herrmann
0

#28 User is offline   PhilKing 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,240
  • Joined: 2012-June-25

Posted 2015-June-28, 07:35

 rhm, on 2015-June-27, 15:22, said:

But that only means you are out of the game if you would like to bid 3 non forcing. Now you would have to double and if opponents do something inconvenient you get stolen blind, never finding your diamond fit.
Not forcing does not mean 3 shows a minimum opening nor that we do not have a high level contract. Fit establishment is crucial and responders strength is not well known.

It seems to me this scenario that opponents inconvenience me is (much) more likely when I am weaker than stronger.


I'm not out the game - my double of 2 shows, of all things a takeout double. But crucially, when partner has a minimum, we get to stop on 3.

I may be slightly biased, since I do not have any strong balanced hands in my 1 opening, so my double almost guarantees diamonds (because I can bid 2NT to show a good 3 or better rebid).

One big advantage of 3 FG is that when we do have the strong hand, we can have simple effective slam auctions, and straightforward decisions if they compete further. Sure we can just keep doubling on a hand like this, but it doesn't show a 46 powerhouse - partner will just pass our second double way too often in my experience.

The "reverse is NF" brigade just seem to be turning normal principles on their head here. I could live with 3 as a one round force here, but not unless playing one of my gadgets - with a hand that wants to stop in 4m partner starts by cueing 3 asking for a stop, and then removes 3NT to 4m to show weakness. Slam hands bid four of either minor forcing directly.

Anyway, I am willing to wager that no one in the entire history of bridge has ever stopped in 3 in this sequence when that was a remotely rational thing to do.
0

#29 User is offline   benlessard 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,465
  • Joined: 2006-January-07
  • Location:Montreal Canada
  • Interests:All games. i really mean all of them.

Posted 2015-June-28, 11:35

A side question

you hold 5332

1S--(2C)--X--(P)
??

ive always bid 2D with that shape with the logic that we could still endup in 2H. But with the philosophy that X really show only hearts and the fact that X with 53 is a lot more likely than 35 in the red some prefer 2H.

Other than this case i agree that X doesnt promise the minor so 2D is a reverse and 3D is GF.
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."
0

#30 User is offline   Vampyr 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,611
  • Joined: 2009-September-15
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:London

Posted 2015-June-28, 11:41

 rhm, on 2015-June-28, 06:46, said:

As usual you completely miss the point.
You have no clue what the discussion is all about.

Rainer Herrmann


This post adds nothing to the subject at hand. If you don't like my comments don't read them. And don't waste others' time by posting crap.
I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones -- Albert Einstein
1

#31 User is offline   nige1 

  • 5-level belongs to me
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 9,128
  • Joined: 2004-August-30
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Glasgow Scotland
  • Interests:Poems Computers

Posted 2015-June-28, 12:50

 Phil, on 2015-June-26, 08:56, said:

This hand appeared in our monthly newsletter:
x x A A K x x A Q J x x x
1 (1) x (2);
?
No discussion about 2N.

 helene_t, on 2015-June-26, 10:12, said:

3S just in case p might think 3d is non forcing
On reflection, agree with Helene_T:

We have no agreement about a 2NT rebid. Presumably, we haven't discussed whether 3 is forcing, although expert opinion is that it should be.

A good player might be reluctant to put his partner to the test if there is any possible ambiguity about 3 when there are other clearly forcing bids at this disposal. That seems to have been the feeling of some of the expert panel. OK! OK ! Not as expert as BBO posters, obviously :)

Double might show 3 s, so perhaps you should bid 3?
0

#32 User is offline   rhm 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,092
  • Joined: 2005-June-27

Posted 2015-June-28, 16:18

 nige1, on 2015-June-28, 12:50, said:

We have no agreement about a 2NT rebid. Presumably, we haven't discussed whether 3 is forcing, although expert opinion is that it should be.

This is just a false summary.
Truth is: Some experts consider a 3 bid forcing and at least as many do not.

Rainer Herrmann
0

#33 User is offline   Jinksy 

  • Experimental biddicist
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,909
  • Joined: 2010-January-02
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2015-June-29, 13:53

 rhm, on 2015-June-28, 06:46, said:

As usual you completely miss the point.
You have no clue what the discussion is all about.

Rainer Herrmann


You can do better than this.
The "4 is a transfer to 4" award goes to Jinksy - PhilKing
0

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users