Old BW problem
#21
Posted 2006-March-21, 17:25
I still think I'd open each of these examples 2D, showing about 14-16 HCP's and a good diamond suit, but not solid. I am not interested in a major fit, and I have a trick source, and I want some preemption if partner is weak. That being the case, I would not have 3D as a delayed call show this. But, that is, admittedly, my own approach and perhaps (could it be?) not shared.
"Gibberish in, gibberish out. A trial judge, three sets of lawyers, and now three appellate judges cannot agree on what this law means. And we ask police officers, prosecutors, defense lawyers, and citizens to enforce or abide by it? The legislature continues to write unreadable statutes. Gibberish should not be enforced as law."
-P.J. Painter.
-P.J. Painter.
#23
Posted 2006-March-21, 17:39
This thread again reinforces the idea of using 2♦ in fourth seat to show a weak hand, say at best a minimum opening bid. The advantages, if they weren't obvious:
(1) Preempts opponents on the hands where you really need to preempt (i.e. 9-12 point openings) not the hands where you really don't (13-16 point openings).
(2) Lets you show that you have six diamonds on hands where it might be hard to show this later in a competitive auction (the minimum hands), thus helping partner bid to the proper level.
(3) Allows partner to use well-practiced evaluation schemes to decide what to bid, rather than having to invent a totally different set of inferences to decide how to bid after an "intermediate two" that is never played in any other situation, or decide what negative inferences apply from the failure to open such an "intermediate two."
(4) Prevents partner from deciding that your subsequent natural, competitive bidding simply must be a fit-showing bid and placing the contract in some ridiculous spot.
(1) Preempts opponents on the hands where you really need to preempt (i.e. 9-12 point openings) not the hands where you really don't (13-16 point openings).
(2) Lets you show that you have six diamonds on hands where it might be hard to show this later in a competitive auction (the minimum hands), thus helping partner bid to the proper level.
(3) Allows partner to use well-practiced evaluation schemes to decide what to bid, rather than having to invent a totally different set of inferences to decide how to bid after an "intermediate two" that is never played in any other situation, or decide what negative inferences apply from the failure to open such an "intermediate two."
(4) Prevents partner from deciding that your subsequent natural, competitive bidding simply must be a fit-showing bid and placing the contract in some ridiculous spot.
Adam W. Meyerson
a.k.a. Appeal Without Merit
a.k.a. Appeal Without Merit
#24
Posted 2006-March-21, 18:07
Or, simply pass out weak hands with long diamonds at IMP's, and find great games and slams when partner knows where your values are. Personally, at IMP's, I'd rather have ability to guage our games and slams than ability to preempt them out of a two-level major contract by not passing.
"Gibberish in, gibberish out. A trial judge, three sets of lawyers, and now three appellate judges cannot agree on what this law means. And we ask police officers, prosecutors, defense lawyers, and citizens to enforce or abide by it? The legislature continues to write unreadable statutes. Gibberish should not be enforced as law."
-P.J. Painter.
-P.J. Painter.
#25
Posted 2006-March-21, 19:51
You are quite welcome in agreeing with your partner any special meaning (such as 6 cards and 14-16) for a 2♦ opening in 4th seat.
I've just some difficulty in understanding how this relate to the thread: the bid posted by Mike777 appeared to be coming out of a natural (or semi-natural) auction: Standard American or 2/1. I'm quite sure he'd have informed us of other options which might have influenced opener's choice.
I've just some difficulty in understanding how this relate to the thread: the bid posted by Mike777 appeared to be coming out of a natural (or semi-natural) auction: Standard American or 2/1. I'm quite sure he'd have informed us of other options which might have influenced opener's choice.

Help
