A pair have an agreement that after 1x (bid) , a negative double can me made with;
5 hcp if opener is forced to bid at the 1 level,
8 hcp if opener is forced to bid at the 2 level,
11 hcp if opener is forced to bid at the 3 level.
Bridge logic or alertable?
Page 1 of 1
5,8,11 bridge logic or alertable?
#1
Posted 2012-September-27, 19:33
“It is not because things are difficult that we do not dare, it is because we do not dare that they are difficult.”
Bridge should be fun!
Bridge should be fun!
#2
Posted 2012-September-27, 19:48
I am nothing remotely resembling a laws expert, but if this negative double structure were alertable, I would be stunned.
#3
Posted 2012-September-27, 21:03
So would I.
--------------------
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
Our ultimate goal on defense is to know by trick two or three everyone's hand at the table. -- Mike777
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
Our ultimate goal on defense is to know by trick two or three everyone's hand at the table. -- Mike777
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
#4
Posted 2012-September-27, 21:51
If the question is "Do we need more strength to commit to higher levels?" I believe that falls under Bridge logic. The understanding you referred to in the OP is about minimum strength for the actions. If the agreement includes a maximum, then we might have disclosure issues.
"Bidding Spades to show spades can work well." (Kenberg)
#5
Posted 2012-September-28, 00:22
That was easy, thanks.
“It is not because things are difficult that we do not dare, it is because we do not dare that they are difficult.”
Bridge should be fun!
Bridge should be fun!
Page 1 of 1

Help
