[gnasher]

han, on Feb 14 2008, 12:47 AM, said:

Isn't weak already invitational? How strong is an invitational hand opposite a redouble?

No, weak is weak. Two ill-fitting ten counts don't add up to an invitation.

In a quick look through my bookshelf, the only examples I found were:

3C: AQ9xx x Jx KQJxx
2C: AQJxx x xx K10xxx

Personally, I'd want better suits for 3C.

FWIW, Miles says that 3C "must be forcing".

[matmat]

what?! no votes for autosplinter?!

heh

i'm with the crowd

2♣ an "oh, did I open this crap?" hand
3♣ Godzilla hand

[rogerclee]

pclayton, on Feb 13 2008, 02:26 PM, said:

I'd say 3♣ looks like a minimum of: ♠AQxxxx ♥x ♦x ♣AKxxx

Agree with this, but I'm not sure anyone has gotten to a big point--what's the upper range, if any?

What does ♠AKQxxx ♥void ♦x ♣AQxxxx bid? Can it bid 3♣, or should it pass first and then start jumping in clubs?

[han]

gnasher, on Feb 13 2008, 07:28 PM, said:

han, on Feb 14 2008, 12:47 AM, said:

Isn't weak already invitational? How strong is an invitational hand opposite a redouble?

No, weak is weak. Two ill-fitting ten counts don't add up to an invitation.

In a quick look through my bookshelf, the only examples I found were:

3C: AQ9xx x Jx KQJxx
2C: AQJxx x xx K10xxx

Personally, I'd want better suits for 3C.

FWIW, Miles says that 3C "must be forcing".

In this context weak obviously means a very minimal hand. But that doesn't mean that the partnership won't go to game, even opposite a minimal redouble.

Doesn't invitational mean that you can stop below game with a poor fit and go to game with a good fit? So yes, if responder has a poor fitting 10-count then they will pass over 2C, but that doesn't mean the bid isn't invitational.

[gnasher]

han, on Feb 14 2008, 03:10 AM, said:

In this context weak obviously means a very minimal hand.

Perhaps the traditional meaning in the UK is because opening bids have a wider range. What Hannie describes as "a very minimal hand" is something I'd regard as a perfectly normal minimum opening.

Anyway, I'm bored of this topic. Anyone got any play problems?

[rogerclee]

gnasher, on Feb 14 2008, 01:21 AM, said:

han, on Feb 14 2008, 03:10 AM, said:

In this context weak obviously means a very minimal hand.

Perhaps the traditional meaning in the UK is because opening bids have a wider range. What Hannie describes as "a very minimal hand" is something I'd regard as a perfectly normal minimum opening.

Anyway, I'm bored of this topic. Anyone got any play problems?

973
62
AK2
T9653

AKQJ4
KT54
Q6
A4

(1H)-P-(P)-X
(P)-2C-(P)-2S
(P)-4S-AP

You declare 4S on the ♦J lead, winning in hand while RHO gives count (even). On the ♠AK, LHO follows once but shows out on the second round. Plan the play.

[whereagles]

3 rounds of diamonds (disc club) and a heart to hand.

[rogerclee]

whereagles, on Feb 14 2008, 06:17 AM, said:

3 rounds of diamonds (disc club) and a heart to hand.

Oh, forgot to add something onto the original post. But no, this seems like a good way to lose 4 heart tricks/ruffs.