[inquiry]

I have never respnded negatively to a post by H_KARLUK and there is no anomosity in this post.... but the fact is, I would have opened 1NT.

[the hog]

jdonn, on Jan 28 2009, 11:07 AM, said:

And yes, if the ace of spades is on my right, and the queen jack of hearts are on my right, and the ace of hearts is on my left, and the opponents lead double dummy, and they can't make anything more valuable than whatever small penalty they get (assuming they set me in any case), then 1NT may not work out best.

Agree with Josh, but he forgot "and if my grandmother had balls she would be my grandfather."

[peachy]

I would have opened 1NT. In the actual auction, 3D shows game-going values combined with values from opener who has reversed; therefore, Pass is out of the question. 3NT.

If in your agreements, opener may Pass 3D, then how would responder force opener to bid again, moreover, force opener to bid again BELOW 3NT which is often the best final contract holding minor suit(s).

[helene_t]

Hamdi, please. People here are trying to tell you that in standard methods (at least what is standard in North America, but in Netherlands and UK most advanced players play the same), 3♦ shows enough to force to game. If you play that, it is an obvious 3NT bid.

If you play 2♥ as fourth suit forcing while 3♦ would be nonforcing I think everyone agrees with you that pass is obvious.

[H_KARLUK]

helene_t, on Jan 28 2009, 11:37 AM, said:

Hamdi, please. People here are trying to tell you that in standard methods (at least what is standard in North America, but in Netherlands and UK most advanced players play the same), 3♦ shows enough to force to game. If you play that, it is an obvious 3NT bid.

If you play 2♥ as fourth suit forcing while 3♦ would be nonforcing I think everyone agrees with you that pass is obvious.

♠♥♦♣
Rehi Helene,

It is so nice to read such another nice comment by you. Frankly speaking I congratulate you that read my mind. I appreciate for th clarification. I think i got th point now. Maybe methods changed. Now did they discard FSF?

In th good old days many studious players were playing like me. Such as Reese, Wolff, Crowhurst, Fishpool, Rowlands, Priday, Horton etc.

Truly yours
Hamdi
♠♥♦♣

[helene_t]

H_KARLUK, on Jan 28 2009, 10:51 AM, said:

Maybe methods changed. Now did they discard FSF?

FSF still applies after a non-reverse, for example
1♥-1♠
2♣-2♦*

There are many other sequences in which the fourth suit may or may not be FSF:

1♣-1♦
1♥-1♠*
is natural in standard but some play it as FSF.

1♥-2♣
2♦-2♠*
is FSF in SAYC but some don't play FSF after a 2/1 response if that is game forcing.

After a reverse, opener has shown 17 points and responder 6 (well in practice they may both have less but it is easier to follow the argument if you assume it to be 17 and 6 ) so the situation is "almost" game forcing and hence responder will force to game much more often than he will sign off. Therefore, we only allocate a single (or maybe two) bids to the weak hands, and most bids will be game force.

Suppose responder has a classical hand for FSF:
1♣-1♠
1♦-?

Kxxxx-xxx-Axx-Kx now bids 2♠. This is forcing and only shows 5+ spades.

[P_Marlowe]

Depending on your agreements, Pass is not an option.

It is quite common to play bids on the 3 level by responder
as forcing to game, if responder does not want to force to
game, he goes via 2NT (one possible agreemet set).

If 3D is gf, I just need to decide, which game rates to be best,
since I have a heart stopper I would go with 3NT.
........................................................................................

Assuming 3D is nf, pass is fine, you are min, so you should
not go on.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[H_KARLUK]

helene_t, on Jan 28 2009, 12:16 PM, said:

Suppose responder has a classical hand for FSF:
1♣-1♠
1♦-?

Kxxxx-xxx-Axx-Kx now bids 2♠. This is forcing and only shows 5+ spades.

Agreed,

Listened same by notable Polish experts some years ago. BTW how about to create another tournament for forum members. Let's flip a coin and either you or I do that.

[P_Marlowe]

helene_t, on Jan 28 2009, 05:16 AM, said:

<snip>

Suppose responder has a classical hand for FSF:
1♣-1♠
2♦-?        (corrected)

Kxxxx-xxx-Axx-Kx now bids 2♠. This is forcing and only shows 5+ spades.

I would add 2S is forcing in NA, but we had this discussion.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[H_KARLUK]

P_Marlowe, on Jan 28 2009, 12:21 PM, said:

Depending on your agreements, Pass is not an option.

It is quite common to play bids on the 3 level by responder
as forcing to game, if responder does not want to force to
game, he goes via 2NT (one possible agreemet set).

If 3D is gf, I just need to decide, which game rates to be best,
since I have a heart stopper I would go with 3NT.
........................................................................................

Assuming 3D is nf, pass is fine, you are min, so you should
not go on.

With kind regards
Marlowe

Hello

So always 1 ♣ bad ? With 1NT is not too easy to miss a slam ? Then maybe I was going to be aggressive opened 1♣ and must rebid @NT? Who knows could describe the hand a little bit better.

I thought 1♣>1♠    2♦>3♦ NF (bcos 2♥ fsf and there is a passed partner). Now you and other esteemed friends enlightened me about modern trends.

Old habits die hard.

Best regards
Hamdi

[P_Marlowe]

H_KARLUK, on Jan 28 2009, 06:18 AM, said:

P_Marlowe, on Jan 28 2009, 12:21 PM, said:

Depending on your agreements, Pass is not an option.

It is quite common to play bids on the 3 level by responder
as forcing to game, if responder does not want to force to
game, he goes via 2NT (one possible agreemet set).

If 3D is gf, I just need to decide, which game rates to be best,
since I have a heart stopper I would go with 3NT.
........................................................................................

Assuming 3D is nf, pass is fine, you are min, so you should
not go on.

With kind regards
Marlowe

Hello

So always 1 ♣ bad ? With 1NT is not too easy to miss a slam ? Then maybe I was going to be aggressive opened 1♣ and must rebid @NT? Who knows could describe the hand a little bit better.

I thought 1♣>1♠    2♦>3♦ NF (bcos 2♥ fsf and there is a passed partner). Now you and other esteemed friends enlightened me about modern trends.

Old habits die hard.

Best regards
Hamdi

I would have opned 1C, made a reverse with 2D,
and than hopefully would know, what my agreements
are.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Codo]

I find a 1 NT bad.

This is not because of the shape, but because it is too strong. 17 HCPS and a nice 5 card suit....

And I would never rebid 2 NT, not with Hearts wide open. So I try 2♦, like you.

Again, I guess the SEF standard is, that 3 Diamond shows a real strong hand with a real good fit. Obviously his pass limits his hand, but I would still bid on.
I would try 3 ♥, asking partner to bid 3 NT with a stopper.

In BWS I would choose the same approach.
When 3 ♦ is non-forcing, I would pass, I have minimum.

[helene_t]

1NT is ok with me. 1♣ is certainly not wrong either.

[Fluffy]

You don't have them wide open Roland, you have Kx, something you would rather receive the lead with. I don't find 2♦ unreasonable, but 2NT would be ok as well.

Hamdi I wouldn't be so much pressed to find a slam when partner is a passed hand, but rather finding best game.

Opening 1NT with that hand also helps finding slams when you have 5431 or 6421 since partner can discard that you had that hand and take 3♥ now as a 3 card suit (at least when you reopen later).

[skjaeran]

3♦ is GF for me, so pass isn't an option. I'd rebid 3NT.

However, I'd pass if my agreements was that 3♦ is NF. Of course.

[whereagles]

helene_t, on Jan 28 2009, 02:01 PM, said:

1NT is ok with me. 1♣ is certainly not wrong either.

Finally, some good sense.

[H_KARLUK]

inquiry, on Jan 28 2009, 06:23 AM, said:

I have never respnded negatively to a post by H_KARLUK and there is no anomosity in this post.... but the fact is, I would have opened 1NT.

Sorry, still I could not find "anomosity". Did you mean animosity ? I use http://www.turkishdi...nary.net/?word=  no need to download, works online and there says "Mere spiritedness or courage"

I never hold a grudge against anybody. So also no rancor, spite, animosity, malice in my side. I am objective, fair and clean.

I respect politeness. I do not wanna be another client of my wife She deals with psychology professionally. I bet their team busy enuff with behavioral issues. Indeed i might be only a craze scientist on some auctions in her opinion.

[Codo]

Fluffy, on Jan 28 2009, 11:32 PM, said:

You don't have them wide open Roland, you have Kx, something you would rather receive the lead with. I don't find 2♦ unreasonable, but 2NT would be ok as well.

...blush...

when I read the example, I had the majors " mentally" switched, sorry.

But I would still try 2 ♦ with my regular partner, because he will get a much better picture of my hand when I continue with 3 NT now.