[han]

Just thinking about exclusion here is ridiculous in my always humble opinion.

[paulg]

So I was the beginner who perpetuated this outrageous bid on my partner. Given the score, I was hoping partner would hold at least 3 diamonds and realise that the bid was probably exclusion. Discussed or not, she played for Scotland a week earlier so is an experienced player.

It's been a while since I've scored -700 (I held seven solid spades, five solidish clubs and a heart).

There is more support for it being non-natural amongst the other experts up here, perhaps greater familiarity with Acol. However my regular partner thinks it is natural too

At least it's made a good story here.

Now Josh, where's that download ....

Paul

[kenrexford]

I am reminded of the Beatles singing Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds. In this case, I am sure that the hidden "LSD" is applicable.

[neilkaz]

cardsharp, on Apr 21 2008, 04:08 PM, said:

So I was the beginner who perpetuated this outrageous bid on my partner. Given the score, I was hoping partner would hold at least 3 diamonds and realise that the bid was probably exclusion. Discussed or not, she played for Scotland a week earlier so is an experienced player.

It's been a while since I've scored -700 (I held seven solid spades, five solidish clubs and a heart).

There is more support for it being non-natural amongst the other experts up here, perhaps greater familiarity with Acol. However my regular partner thinks it is natural too

At least it's made a good story here.

Now Josh, where's that download ....

Paul

With all due respect, I think we can see that it would be a good idea to include exclusion in your notes if you intend to ever use it.

Perhaps a 4m overcall of 1m would be better used as exclusion to save room if PD is broke, but maybe that sequence is best used as a monster take out with a void and then save the 5 level overcall for exclusion since, in general to go that high with no knowledge of PD's hand you are looking for 1 specific ace anyhow.

It does seem good to define whether the direct jump to 5m is to play or exclusion or whether doubling first and then bidding 5m is exclusion.

.. neilkaz ..

[the hog]

Acol has nothing to do with it. This bid is 100% to play.

[neilkaz]

The_Hog, on Apr 21 2008, 09:28 PM, said:

Acol has nothing to do with it. This bid is 100% to play.

OK...you're Australian if I recall so you get your fair share of ACOL with 4 card majors I'd suspect.

So if you want to play exclusion with the monster Paul was dealt you must double first and then bid 5♦ ?

This does make sense since one all one risks is having the opps at 5♦ prior to your 2nd call and you can then bid your suit and imply super playing strength.

Love this forum and it is SO instructive. .. neilkaz ..

[jdonn]

neilkaz, on Apr 21 2008, 05:45 PM, said:

Now Josh, where's that download ....

http://web3.acbl.org/internet/websiteForms...pbForm?OpenForm

[P_Marlowe]

neilkaz, on Apr 21 2008, 11:45 PM, said:

The_Hog, on Apr 21 2008, 09:28 PM, said:

Acol has nothing to do with it. This bid is 100% to play.

OK...you're Australian if I recall so you get your fair share of ACOL with 4 card majors I'd suspect.

So if you want to play exclusion with the monster Paul was dealt you must double first and then bid 5♦ ?

This does make sense since one all one risks is having the opps at 5♦ prior to your 2nd call and you can then bid your suit and imply super playing strength.

Love this forum and it is SO instructive. .. neilkaz ..

A 1S overcall, intending to follow up with 6C, is a
simpler alternative and less prone to create a
disaster. The risk that 1S gets passed out is ...

Just because I think 5D is artifical and even has to
show the actual hand, does not mean I like it, and
I would never make this bid unless being 100%
sure, what it means, and I would never be 100% sure,
because for certain bids (like bidding the enemy suits)
there are more meanings out there than one believes.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[the hog]

Even if you are not playing Roman Jump overcalls or Ghestem where you can show 2 specific suits, why not bid 2NT to show a M/m 2 suiter? That would be a good start, then you can make forcing bids in Ds to show the strength of the hand.

[gwnn]

cardsharp, on Apr 22 2008, 12:08 AM, said:

Discussed or not, she played for Scotland a week earlier so is an experienced player.

I hope you mean that as "well, she's a good player, so I am probably wrong, since she and lots of good players in this thread (and poor players like gwnn) have expressed their opinion that 5♦ here should be to play" and not "well, she's a good player so I figured she'd understand. I think good players should realize this is not to play."

[paulg]

gwnn, on Apr 22 2008, 07:17 AM, said:

cardsharp, on Apr 22 2008, 12:08 AM, said:

Discussed or not, she played for Scotland a week earlier so is an experienced player.

I hope you mean that as "well, she's a good player, so I am probably wrong, since she and lots of good players in this thread (and poor players like gwnn) have expressed their opinion that 5♦ here should be to play" and not "well, she's a good player so I figured she'd understand. I think good players should realize this is not to play."

Yes, essentially.

Actually what I meant was, "I hope she has sufficient diamonds to know that it is not natural, and then she is certainly good enough to work out what it might mean absent discussion".

I was quite aware that this was a glory or bust bid, and that I would be fully responsible for all outcomes. I posted it just to get abused a bit, but it was interesting to see that there is no consistent meaning for the bid amongst Scottish experts and I wondered if this was global - now I know.

In mitigation, I did have most things right on the hand. Bidding the small slam gains no IMPs, the auction will be at 5♦ for your next call so you will never have the chance to find out about the ♥A, and we were actually 10 IMPs worse off than estimated.

[brianshark]

Sorry Paul but I think this is a clear natural bid. Any hand that has some diamond void and wants to force partner to bid something can bid 4♦ which makes even less sense as a natural bid than a jump to game. If you have some big major hand, why would you want partner to choose one at the 5-level?

[helene_t]

The_Hog, on Apr 22 2008, 07:01 AM, said:

Even if you are not playing Roman Jump overcalls or Ghestem where you can show 2 specific suits, why not bid 2NT to show a M/m 2 suiter? That would be a good start, then you can make forcing bids in Ds to show the strength of the hand.

2N usually shows hearts/clubs. Might not be the optimal treatment but many pairs don't have a way to show spades/otherminor.

[whereagles]

well.. neilkaz did make the right inference and got it right. I think opps playing weak NT is the key. Unless opener has a 11-13 hcp 4441, there's little chance pard can have solid diamonds and playing strength to the 5 level.

but hey, pard's actual hand is probably LESS likely than a bucketload of diamonds and a goodish side suit.

[FrancesHinden]

I'm very used to playing against Acol and I still think it's natural, for two reasons:
i) General rule: unless specifically agreed otherwise, game is always bid to play
ii) Specific hand: partner has lots of ways of showing a huge single- or two-suiter, but no other way of showing a very good hand that wants to play in diamonds

Yes, I know we have two diamonds and LHO supposedly has 4 which means partner only has seven... but I've still seen Acol players open 1D on a 3-card suit even when it is not systemic.

[Flameous]

I know I wouldn't have passed with this hand, what ever the bid means. If it was natural, p should have the game in own hand which means my ace just made slam playable. If it's not, as was the case, we end in atleast better contract even if partner doesn't get the info he propably was after.

But my bid with the monster hand would have been 2♦, not 5. (Spades and other)

[the hog]

helene_t, on Apr 22 2008, 04:33 PM, said:

The_Hog, on Apr 22 2008, 07:01 AM, said:

Even if you are not playing Roman Jump overcalls or Ghestem where you can show 2 specific suits, why not bid 2NT to show a M/m 2 suiter? That would be a good start, then you can make forcing bids in Ds to show the strength of the hand.

2N usually shows hearts/clubs. Might not be the optimal treatment but many pairs don't have a way to show spades/otherminor.

No Helene, 2NT usually shows C and a Major in this sequence if you play Michaels.
Playing Roman JO 2NT actually shows a gf unspecified 2 suiter.

[han]

2NT = clubs and a major, standard in Laos and other obscure places.

[jdonn]

The_Hog, on Apr 22 2008, 09:00 PM, said:

No Helene, 2NT usually shows C and a Major in this sequence if you play Michaels.

Whhhhaaaaaaaa?

Don't worry Helene, I think your apology is imminent

[the hog]

jdonn, on Apr 23 2008, 09:03 AM, said:

The_Hog, on Apr 22 2008, 09:00 PM, said:

No Helene, 2NT usually shows C and a Major in this sequence if you play Michaels.

Whhhhaaaaaaaa?

Don't worry Helene, I think your apology is imminent

Seriously absolutely stock standard in Oz and with every pd I have ever played that it ,[ (1D) 2NT ], shows C+ an unspecified major. Maybe you play it differently, but then I am curious how you show C+S.

Btw I assume none of you disagree with my comment re RJO 2NT being a gf 2 suiter. Just looked this up in the Yallouze book again.