[DWM]

---

Bidding has gone

(2♥*) - P - (2♠*) -

I knew that the 2♥ is Lucas as it was on thier system card and we discussed it before we started.

I did not ask what the 2♠ bid was and passed to see how things developed. Probably a mistake but I was confused.

Afterwards I asked why the 2♠ was alerted and I was told it was pass or correct.

I take it they got lucky on this one as it stands. My main question is what should have I done if I asked what the 2♠ bid was before I passed? Both in bidding and legaly.

We missed slam whilst they stumbled on thier 10 card fit.

[helene_t]

Double seems normal. This is t/o and emphasises the minors. It's a little scarry if partner leaves your double in but what else can you do.

[Free]

Dbl, what else?

[paulg]

Firstly I like to compliment your attitude in this situation. Through inexperience you have had a poor result but are not complaining about the 'foul methods' used by the opposition - makes a pleasant change in these forums.

You say that you knew that 2♥ was Lucas, but I think the rest of the auction implies that you may not have appreciated what this really meant. Specifically, looking at your own hand, it is highly likely that the opener has 5 hearts and 4 spades and that he will not be bidding, with his weak hand, again. So you need to take action now.

As you note, you should ask about the meaning of 2♠. Then you can make your plan for the hand.

It strikes me that this is not going to be an easy hand to bid, but I agree with Free that the first step is to double (for takeout) and just hope that things work out. It is unclear that you will reach your slam after such pre-emption, but start with obvious, discover their second suit (without the hand being passed out) and then try to show the strength of the hand.

Finally, though irrelevant to this problem, I've noticed that many people misdescribe Lucas 2s. Particularly in my local clubs, people mean that the opener shows a 5-card major and 4-card minor but this is more properly called Muiderberg.

Paul

[mycroft]

As far as explanations to the opponents go, of course, both Lucas and Muiderberg (and Flannery, Roman, Bergen, and whatever) are both incomplete and, if not further described, put the opponents in an unenviable position.

1) They know what it means. But they know a different system than you (your Flannery allows 4-6, for example, or "which 3m shows the bigger Bergen Raise?").
2) They know what it means. But you don't (Lucas vs. Muiderberg, for instance).
3) They don't know what it means. It seems that you think that "everybody" should know this, so it embarrasses them to ask. I know "you" don't think that, I know it shouldn't be embarrassing to admit lack of knowledge, but it happens anyway. And of course, once they ask, they "know" based on your variation of the convention, and are now in 1) or 2) territory for the next one.

I realize that on BBO typing and space constraints demand some abbreviations, and it's "convenient" to slide by with the convention name. And 90% of the time, it works out just fine. But it is not full disclosure, and the other 10% of the time, it is bad.

Michael (who was once told by his more experienced partner that not only was describing by convention name okay, but it was more correct than giving the explanation of the bid. A quick dive into the regs disabused her of *that* notion).

[han]

All true mycroft, but it has little to do with the pass of 2S.

[mycroft]

Certainly. While I notice that (usually due to delays in reading) my posts of late seem to try to drag the thread back on topic, this time I was just posting an apostraphe around the previous poster's "Lucas vs. Muiderberg" comment.

Now, I'm trying to find out myself what a "Niemeijer" auction is for another thread. I'm a little embarrassed myself, to ask :-)

Michael.

[helene_t]

mycroft, on Jul 10 2007, 05:55 PM, said:

Now, I'm trying to find out myself what a "Niemeijer" auction is for another thread. I'm a little embarrassed myself, to ask :-)

Michael.

Niemeijer was originally meant as an extended version of Puppet Stayman but 99% of those who have "Niemeijer" on their cc just play plain PS.

[DWM]

Sorry it was Lucas as in Hearts and a Minor. Did not realise the difference until I looked into it a bit more. On thier card it did say Hearts and a Minor, I was being lazy with the typing.

[P_Marlowe]

DWM, on Jul 11 2007, 07:09 AM, said:

Sorry it was Lucas as in Hearts and a Minor.  Did not realise the difference until I looked into it a bit more.  On thier card it did say Hearts and a Minor, I was being lazy with the typing.

2H = hearts+minor? and 2S is pass
or correct?
I dont believe this, if opener showed 9 cards outside
spades, 2S has to be a 6 carder, and opener will
usually pass, ... he wont show his minor.

First off all, if a bid gets alerted always ask,
it simplifies life, and please insist of a full
explanantion, the name is not sufficient.

If you always ask, there is no UI involved,
which would be the case, if you would ask only
when you are interested in bidding and after the
explanation pass. The nice part being, your partner
also knows, what the bid means.

Assuming you know, that the bid shows spades,
you can double for t/o, partner will know, it is for
the minors (his last help: looking at his own hand).

With kind regards
Marlowe