BBO Discussion Forums: Assign the blame - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Assign the blame

#21 User is offline   kenrexford 

  • Brain Farts and Actual Farts Increasing with Age
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 9,586
  • Joined: 2005-September-21
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Lima, Allen County, North-West-Central Ohio, USA
  • Interests:www.limadbc.blogspot.com editor/contributor

Posted 2010-June-07, 13:19

Phil, on Jun 7 2010, 01:30 PM, said:

kenrexford, on Jun 7 2010, 01:16 PM, said:

... 2♣.  2NT was "an option," but it seems to create problems when Opener shows some sort of balanced hand.  Plus, the partnership tends to avoid 2NT unless primed-out (aces and spaces externally).

It seems to me the more balanced, even if 'primed out' hands should start with 2♣.

However, I'm confused since earlier you said:

Quote

because 2NT is NOT AVAILABLE as JACOBY (for various reasons).

The way we play, 2♣ often caters to oddball hands.

Also, 2NT was unavailable because I hate 2NT as Jacoby. Therefore, it was not "available" to me because I hate it. If I ever bid it, I have a hand where a straightforward auction will be easy to handle.

Surely everyone would agree that this Responder's hand is sick and not capable of description. Well, we bid 2♣ with any insane hands. Partner, looking at AKQ in clubs, knew I had a doozy from my first bid.
"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.
0

#22 User is offline   awm 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 8,708
  • Joined: 2005-February-09
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Zurich, Switzerland

Posted 2010-June-07, 18:57

How does opener know that responder doesn't have a hand like AKJx Q QJxx xxxx? This seems like an obvious game force, and the appropriate controls (heart shortage, trump honors, nothing in the minors) seem to be present. How is 7♠ on a trump lead? It seems like you need spades 2-2 (since you are ruffing three hearts in dummy, two of which must be with top trumps) and clubs 3-2. A pretty lousy grand slam, and a hand like this seems more likely than six card trump support? Maybe this hand is a splinter, but maybe we don't particularly love to splinter with a stiff honor and four dead in a side suit.

From responder's viewpoint, opener has "serious" extras and a diamond control; it is tough to visualize a hand that doesn't have five-level safety, or a hand with the requisite controls that doesn't at least offer play for slam (seeing as ♠Qxxxx ♥Axxx ♦- ♣Axxx would open 2♦ in this style).

I agree with the comment that responder should take control over 3NT (serious).
Adam W. Meyerson
a.k.a. Appeal Without Merit
0

#23 User is offline   kenrexford 

  • Brain Farts and Actual Farts Increasing with Age
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 9,586
  • Joined: 2005-September-21
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Lima, Allen County, North-West-Central Ohio, USA
  • Interests:www.limadbc.blogspot.com editor/contributor

Posted 2010-June-07, 20:59

awm, on Jun 7 2010, 07:57 PM, said:

How does opener know that responder doesn't have a hand like AKJx Q QJxx xxxx? This seems like an obvious game force, and the appropriate controls (heart shortage, trump honors, nothing in the minors) seem to be present. How is 7♠ on a trump lead? It seems like you need spades 2-2 (since you are ruffing three hearts in dummy, two of which must be with top trumps) and clubs 3-2. A pretty lousy grand slam, and a hand like this seems more likely than six card trump support? Maybe this hand is a splinter, but maybe we don't particularly love to splinter with a stiff honor and four dead in a side suit.

From responder's viewpoint, opener has "serious" extras and a diamond control; it is tough to visualize a hand that doesn't have five-level safety, or a hand with the requisite controls that doesn't at least offer play for slam (seeing as ♠Qxxxx ♥Axxx ♦- ♣Axxx would open 2♦ in this style).

I agree with the comment that responder should take control over 3NT (serious).

That's a classic light splinter hand. The auction would go:

1S-3C
3D(asking)-3H(stiff somewhere, minimum GF)
3S(where?)-4H(hearts, poor external controls)

So, that can be ruled out.

Could have the same general hand with a fifth spade, though.
"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.
0

#24 User is offline   pirate22 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 638
  • Joined: 2008-November-06
  • Location:asia at present time now HK time
  • Interests:Bridge- scuba-natural sex,no porn:)<br> Associate member I.B.P.A. workaholic

Posted 2010-June-07, 21:25

well getting near to the rub 1sp--p--3cl (but im not happy with that)

Why have we not proceeded down the path 1sp--p---4cl!Splinter
4d!--p-- 5cl
5h --p-- 7 sp
0

#25 User is offline   kenrexford 

  • Brain Farts and Actual Farts Increasing with Age
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 9,586
  • Joined: 2005-September-21
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Lima, Allen County, North-West-Central Ohio, USA
  • Interests:www.limadbc.blogspot.com editor/contributor

Posted 2010-June-08, 06:35

pirate22, on Jun 7 2010, 10:25 PM, said:

well getting near to the rub 1sp--p--3cl (but im not happy with that)

Why have we not proceeded down the path 1sp--p---4cl!Splinter
4d!--p-- 5cl
5h --p-- 7 sp

This was a possible sequence that I considered. I actually also considered showing the "light splinter" and then bidding past 4♠. There is no unreasonable start, IMO, as this qualifies as a freak hand.
"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.
0

#26 User is offline   ONEferBRID 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 835
  • Joined: 2009-May-03

Posted 2010-June-08, 07:33

pirate22, on Jun 7 2010, 10:25 PM, said:

well getting near to the rub  1sp--p--3cl (but im not happy with that)

Why have we not proceeded down the path
  1sp--p---4cl! (Splinter)
  4d!--p-- 5cl
  5h --p-- 7 sp

Opener: ♠Qxxxx ♥Axxx ♦-- ♣AKQx
Responder: ♠AKxxxx ♥x ♦Qxxxx ♣x

Ok, 4C! is a splinter.
Does 4D! promise 1st Rnd Ctrl ?
   Let's say it does... it could be A x (x... )

Then, what is 5C ! ... ostensibly showing a void.
5H seems ok...
But, it seems quite a leap to 7S with so little info.
Don Stenmark ( TWOferBRIDGE )
0

#27 User is offline   ONEferBRID 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 835
  • Joined: 2009-May-03

Posted 2010-June-08, 07:36

No need for Void replies with this 12 call sequence after 1S - Jac2NT!:

Opener: ♠Qxxxx ♥Axxx ♦-- ♣AKQx
Responder: ♠AKxxxx ♥x ♦Qxxxx ♣x

1S - Jac2NT!
3D! (Diam shortness) - 3H
3S ( waiting ) - 4C ( Opener realizes this must be shortness )
4D ( void ) - 4NT ( no need for void replies now )
5S ( 2 + sQ ) - 5NT
6C ( cK ) - 6D ( 2nd K-ask )
7C ( no hK, but cQ ) - 7S
Don Stenmark ( TWOferBRIDGE )
0
  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users