mentor/mentee disagreement #3 2/1 nmf (fsf to game)
#2
Posted 2013-June-28, 13:41
gszes, on 2013-June-28, 12:51, said:
So how do we proceed and why????? Does your partnership have a firm
agreement on this bidding???
I prefer a style in which a 2NT rebid is a probe for 3N based on the quality of the long minor
If I have such a tool available I'll bid, otherwise I'll pass
#4
Posted 2013-June-28, 15:03
#5
Posted 2013-June-28, 18:07
wank, on 2013-June-28, 15:03, said:
My thoughts exactly. + quite a few.
"Learn from the mistakes of others. You won't live long enough to make them all yourself."
"One advantage of bad bidding is that you get practice at playing atrocious contracts."
-Alfred Sheinwold
#6
Posted 2013-June-28, 19:06
wank, on 2013-June-28, 15:03, said:
chasetb, on 2013-June-28, 18:07, said:
I don't think 3D should even be invitational (just a nuisance raise) and chose the 3NT blast.
#7
Posted 2013-July-01, 03:16
I have a hand worth an inv. raise, I make the inv. raise.
This would be more of a problem hand, if I had responded with 1S
instead of 1H, swap hearts with club.
I think the hand is still worth another bid, which would be 2NT.
With kind regards
Marlowe
Uwe Gebhardt (P_Marlowe)
#8
Posted 2013-July-09, 15:16
was the fact no one chose a 2s bid. Majors/NT/minors. The 2s bid here would seem
to be merely a way of showing extra values and exploring NT. I see no reason why
this hand should arbitrarily bid 3n when there is no club stop and it is very easy to
show this type of hand by bidding 2s.
Opener has shown an unbalanced hand is it possible that clubs is opener's short suit?
I say this because while 3n might be the right contract if opener is short in clubs 5d or
even 6d might be possible and a jump to 3n makes it impossible to find.
Axxx Axxx Qx xxx opposite Kxx Kxx AKJxxx x gives us a very good chance of making
5d while 3n may make or wither away at down 1 or 2 before we have a chance. If
opener has a little more or a club void 6d becomes reasonable. Bidding 2s showing
a problem with NT and the only problem left is clubs.
Rather than open a new dialog on this what is the meaning of a 2s bid here??? I am
curious. Please don't recite a mantra similar to I am balanced therefore I bid like I
am balanced. Opener is unbalanced but we have no idea where and therefore we
should be concerned about NT as a final contract. This is a good topic for discussion.
#9
Posted 2013-July-09, 17:06
I think it is somewhat simplistic to think only 3NT is in play as a possible game. Kxx, Qx, AKxxxxx, x gives us a reasonable 5D contract.
My bid would be 3D and I hope partner can keep the bidding alive.
#12
Posted 2013-July-10, 02:02
#13
Posted 2013-July-10, 03:21
In auctions where opener's rebid promises six, it makes sense to play 2NT as forcing, since if partner does not want to raise to 3NT, 3♦ will usually be an equal or better partscore. 2♠ is more descriptive, but it is game-forcing for me.
My first thought was to bash 3NT, but partner just does not hold the nut minimum (Kx xx AKJxxx xxx) often enough.
#14
Posted 2013-July-25, 16:41
PhilKing, on 2013-July-10, 03:21, said:
In auctions where opener's rebid promises six, it makes sense to play 2NT as forcing, since if partner does not want to raise to 3NT, 3♦ will usually be an equal or better partscore. 2♠ is more descriptive, but it is game-forcing for me.
My first thought was to bash 3NT, but partner just does not hold the nut minimum (Kx xx AKJxxx xxx) often enough.
I am curious if the bidding had gone p p 1d 1h 2d p would 2s then be a viable bid since you were
already limited as a passed hand??? If that is so, why would you limit your ability to search for nt
by making the 2s bid game forcing instead of invitational or greater?? I ask this of you because you
were the only one to address my question about 2s.
#15
Posted 2013-July-25, 17:36
gszes, on 2013-July-25, 16:41, said:
already limited as a passed hand??? If that is so, why would you limit your ability to search for nt
by making the 2s bid game forcing instead of invitational or greater?? I ask this of you because you
were the only one to address my question about 2s.
I actually do something off the wall here:
2♠ = relay, opener bids 2NT as a default, unless extreme
2NT = nat GF
3♦ = nat GF
after 2♠-2NT:
3♣ = 4♥, 6♣, inv
3♦ = inv
3♥ = inv (direct 3♥ GF)
3♠ = ♥+♠values (can bid 2NT GF with club honour)
I hope this helps.
Playing standard, I prefer 2♠ to be game forcing by an unpassed hand. Subsequent auctions gain more clarity when we are strong, at the cost of some loss of accuracy on one specific invitational hand.
Has your mentee seen the poll results?
#16
Posted 2013-July-26, 14:13
There has been a discussion of a 2♠ rebid (merits, etc) with PhllKing suggesting if he was a passed hand, he would bid 2♠ (transfer to 2NT unless extreme) and 2NT (instead of 2♠ being gameforce). Well, as a passed hand, you are unlikely to have a game force hand, so I wonder if he meant that if this ten hcp was not a passed hand.
The method he describes is almost exactly the method proposed by Krzysztof Martens in one of his books. Specifically for him1♦ - 1♥
2♦ - ?
He plays
- 2♠ = concentration of values, looking for NT if partner can stop the other suit (and difference between 2NT and 3NT rebid by opener is max or min for 2♦ rebid).
- 2NT = game force, likely notrump contract, opener describes his hand by raising hearts with three, bidding a singleton if he has one (3♦ is singleton heart), or bidding 3NT otherwise.
- 3♣ = similar to 2♠ but now, looing for spade stoppers
- 3♦ = natural, invitational
- 3NT = might be thin game no fit, but will have black suit stopped (other option is pass with such hands if "thin")
I am not suggesting anyone play this. IT is just philking's posting brought back the memories of reading that in a book of Krzysztof's at last years Summer Nationals.
#17
Posted 2013-July-26, 15:12
inquiry, on 2013-July-26, 14:13, said:
There has been a discussion of a 2♠ rebid (merits, etc) with PhllKing suggesting if he was a passed hand, he would bid 2♠ (transfer to 2NT unless extreme) and 2NT (instead of 2♠ being gameforce). Well, as a passed hand, you are unlikely to have a game force hand, so I wonder if he meant that if this ten hcp was not a passed hand.
The method he describes is almost exactly the method proposed by Krzysztof Martens in one of his books. Specifically for him1♦ - 1♥
2♦ - ?
He plays
- 2♠ = concentration of values, looking for NT if partner can stop the other suit (and difference between 2NT and 3NT rebid by opener is max or min for 2♦ rebid).
- 2NT = game force, likely notrump contract, opener describes his hand by raising hearts with three, bidding a singleton if he has one (3♦ is singleton heart), or bidding 3NT otherwise.
- 3♣ = similar to 2♠ but now, looing for spade stoppers
- 3♦ = natural, invitational
- 3NT = might be thin game no fit, but will have black suit stopped (other option is pass with such hands if "thin")
I am not suggesting anyone play this. IT is just philking's posting brought back the memories of reading that in a book of Krzysztof's at last years Summer Nationals.
FWIW you have the wrong end of the stick as to what I was suggesting - 2♠ is obviously not a relay as a passed hand. Nor do I play 2NT and 3♦ as game forcing having passed.
I know technically it reads as though I did say that, but it ain't so. I was describing my methods in general, but everything is nat by a passed hand.