BBO Discussion Forums: Unusual Versus Unusual - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Unusual Versus Unusual

#1 User is offline   Bbradley62 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,542
  • Joined: 2010-February-01
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Brooklyn, NY, USA

Posted 2011-May-15, 09:15



I'm copying this hand from another thread. GIB doesn't seem to play UVU in the usual way.
0

#2 User is offline   BillHiggin 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 499
  • Joined: 2007-February-03

Posted 2011-May-15, 10:01

I'll bite.
What is "the usual way"?

The explanation given for 3♣ seems to match what I think is the standard(original version). Danny Klienman suggested another approach which I would prefer if all other things were equal. But competing versions is always a very real danger.
You must know the rules well - so that you may break them wisely!
0

#3 User is offline   Bbradley62 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,542
  • Joined: 2010-February-01
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Brooklyn, NY, USA

Posted 2011-May-15, 11:53

I think this explains the most common understanding of the convention, from http://web2.acbl.org...ons/unusual.pdf' .

Quote

There are different variations — this is one of them.
1. Bid 3♣ with a limit raise or better in hearts.
2. Bid 3♦ with a limit raise or better in spades.
3. Raise partner’s major with 7-10 support points.
4. Bid three of the other major with a hand similar to a good weak-two bid — this is natural and constructive but non-forcing.
5. Double with a hand that is worth a redouble of a takeout double. This says that you can double at least one of their suits for penalty and promises another bid.


Added later: The theme is to bid the lower of opponents' two suits to show the lower of the other two suits (one of which parter has already bid) and bid the higher of opps' two suits to show the higher of the other two.
0

#4 User is offline   Bbradley62 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,542
  • Joined: 2010-February-01
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Brooklyn, NY, USA

Posted 2011-May-15, 12:05

View PostBillHiggin, on 2011-May-15, 10:01, said:

I'll bite.
What is "the usual way"?

The explanation given for 3♣ seems to match what I think is the standard(original version). Danny Klieneman (sp?) suggested another approach which I would prefer if all other things were equal. But competing versions is always a very real danger.

To help others understand GIB, can you explain your understanding of the convention, if it matches GIB's? Thanks!
0

#5 User is offline   gwnn 

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

Posted 2011-May-15, 12:24

I first learned it as

3♣=hearts
3♦=spades

but in Robson-Segal they give (I think)
3♣=other major
3♦=raise of partner's

and GIB appears to play
3♣=raise
3♦=other major
... and I can prove it with my usual, flawless logic.
      George Carlin
0

#6 User is offline   Bbradley62 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,542
  • Joined: 2010-February-01
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Brooklyn, NY, USA

Posted 2011-May-15, 12:27

Thanks. Then, is it always lower=partner's suit and higher=other?
0

#7 User is offline   gwnn 

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

Posted 2011-May-15, 12:37

oh well I don't know if it works for minor suit openings as well. I've never heard of that frankly.
... and I can prove it with my usual, flawless logic.
      George Carlin
0

#8 User is offline   Bbradley62 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,542
  • Joined: 2010-February-01
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Brooklyn, NY, USA

Posted 2011-May-15, 12:44

ok, then what happens over 1m-(2NT)?
0

#9 User is offline   gwnn 

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

Posted 2011-May-15, 13:10

i dont know.. sorry.
... and I can prove it with my usual, flawless logic.
      George Carlin
0

#10 User is offline   BillHiggin 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 499
  • Joined: 2007-February-03

Posted 2011-May-15, 14:02

View PostBbradley62, on 2011-May-15, 12:44, said:

ok, then what happens over 1m-(2NT)?


Older version (GIB): cheap cue = raise, dear cue = 4th suit

Kleinman version: cheap = cheap, dear = dear. Exception for non touching suits - transfer.
You must know the rules well - so that you may break them wisely!
0

#11 User is offline   Bbradley62 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,542
  • Joined: 2010-February-01
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Brooklyn, NY, USA

Posted 2011-May-15, 14:22

Great. Thanks!
0

#12 User is offline   Bbradley62 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,542
  • Joined: 2010-February-01
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Brooklyn, NY, USA

Posted 2011-December-11, 20:51

GIB's handling of UVU might be good info to be added to GIB's System Notes.
0

#13 User is offline   georgi 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Yellows
  • Posts: 1,317
  • Joined: 2007-December-30
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bulgaria

Posted 2011-December-12, 00:48

View PostBbradley62, on 2011-May-15, 12:44, said:

ok, then what happens over 1m-(2NT)?


For GIB when there are two suits shown ( clearly ) it could use these two suits by showing support in partner's suit and unbidded 4th suit.

This includes

1♣ - 2♣ (majors) - ?
=> 2♥ - Limit raise or better in ♣ -- 4+ ♣; 10-12 total points
=> 2♠ - Constructive, 4th suit -- 5+ ♦; 10+ total points
Similar for 1♦ - 2♦

1♥ - 2NT ( minors ) - ?
=> 3♣ - Limit raise or better in ♥ -- 4+ ♥; 10-12 total points
=> 3♦ - Constructive, 4th suit -- 5+ ♠; 10+ total points
Similar for 1♠ - 2NT

1♣ - 2NT ( ♦ + ♥ ) - ?
=> 3♦ - Limit raise or better in C -- 4+ ♣; 10-12 total points
=> 3♥ - Constructive, 4th suit -- 5+ ♠; 10+ total points
Similar for 1♦ - 2NT ( ♣ + ♥ )

#14 User is offline   Bbradley62 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,542
  • Joined: 2010-February-01
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Brooklyn, NY, USA

Posted 2011-December-12, 07:36

View Postgeorgi, on 2011-December-12, 00:48, said:

For GIB when there are two suits shown ( clearly ) it could use these two suits by showing support in partner's suit and unbidded 4th suit...

"could"? Does that mean you are suggesting a potential change for GIB's system, or are you telling us what GIB's system actually is? Please note that the OP was about an auction that started 1♠-2N, which is less obvious than 1♥-2N. Sorry, but OP was before I knew that myhands links eventually expired.
0

#15 User is offline   georgi 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Yellows
  • Posts: 1,317
  • Joined: 2007-December-30
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bulgaria

Posted 2011-December-12, 08:45

View PostBbradley62, on 2011-December-12, 07:36, said:

"could"? Does that mean you are suggesting a potential change for GIB's system, or are you telling us what GIB's system actually is? Please note that the OP was about an auction that started 1♠-2N, which is less obvious than 1♥-2N. Sorry, but OP was before I knew that myhands links eventually expired.


I mean this is the actual possession in GIB book. GIB uses these sequences currently.

1♠ - 2NT - 3♣/3♦ is identical with 1♥ - 2NT, just 3♣ will show fit in spades and 3♦ will show constructive hearts.

1♠ - 2NT - 3♥ - Natural, not forcing -- 2- ♠; twice rebiddable ♥; 7-9 total points

#16 User is offline   Bbradley62 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,542
  • Joined: 2010-February-01
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Brooklyn, NY, USA

Posted 2011-December-12, 09:07

Thank you. I'd like to repeat my request that this be added to the GIB System Notes document, since interpretation of this convention is not universal.
0

#17 User is offline   barmar 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 21,422
  • Joined: 2004-August-21
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2011-December-12, 10:45

GIB always plays Lower = Limit Raise, Higher = Constructive, 4th Suit.

While it's not specified in the system notes (I'll try to remember to update it the next time I'm working on them), the mouseover makes it clear.

#18 User is offline   Bbradley62 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,542
  • Joined: 2010-February-01
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Brooklyn, NY, USA

Posted 2011-December-12, 10:53

View Postbarmar, on 2011-December-12, 10:45, said:

While it's not specified in the system notes (I'll try to remember to update it the next time I'm working on them), the mouseover makes it clear.

Thank you. Of course, you don't always get the benefit of the mouseover, such as when you're playing with (or against) a GIB in an Express game.
0
Page 1 of 1
  • 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