[ArtK78]

Phil, on 2011-July-27, 12:43, said:

All pairs, very weak field.

1. W/R AT8x AQx JTxx Jx. You open 1♦ (4+), (2♠ preemptive), pard makes a neg x, back to you.

2. All vul. Jxxx Kxxxx xx xx. 1N pass pass ?

1. I pass. If I go plus against 2♠x my matchpoint result should be very good. But, aside from that, I don't like my other choice - 2NT.

Do I know anything about my LHO? Is he/she supersound with preemptive jumps at this vul?

2. I pass. Especially in a weak field, I don't want to stick my neck out with such a weak hand vul. If partner has a good hand, we might go plus at 100 per trick against 1NT.

[Zelandakh]

I find this rather interesting. Not long ago we were discussing whether Landy should have an upper limit and some of the most senior posters here were squarely on the side that this should not be the case. Now we have a prime 14 count opposite a Landy overcall and cannot make a move. It seems to me that these two positions are incompatible.

[Phil]

Zelandakh, on 2011-July-29, 02:24, said:

I find this rather interesting. Not long ago we were discussing whether Landy should have an upper limit and some of the most senior posters here were squarely on the side that this should not be the case. Now we have a prime 14 count opposite a Landy overcall and cannot make a move. It seems to me that these two positions are incompatible.

Our RHO has opened 1N and we pass with our Kxx ATx AKx xxxx. We also do not have any (significant) tenaces, nor ruffing values to speak of.

The worse partner's hand, the more he can expect from ours. The objective is also to compete, not necessarily to bid our 21 point games.

There are 11 points unaccounted for. Does anyone really believe that partner is likely to have them all?

At IMPs I would raise of course. Partner isn't likely to be horsing around with some six count vulnerable, unless he has great shape.