BBO Discussion Forums: (1NT)-p-(p)-2S? - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

(1NT)-p-(p)-2S?

#1 User is offline   kgr 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,442
  • Joined: 2003-April-11

Posted 2008-December-10, 14:31

Scoring: MP

(1NT)-p-(p)-?
Do you need anything to bid 2S here? what is the minimum you change to bid 2S?
http://bss2html.atspace.cc/
0

#2 User is offline   han 

  • Under bidder
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 11,797
  • Joined: 2004-July-25
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Amsterdam, the Netherlands

Posted 2008-December-10, 14:31

Yes.
Please note: I am interested in boring, bog standard, 2/1.

- hrothgar
0

#3 User is offline   Cascade 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Yellows
  • Posts: 6,772
  • Joined: 2003-July-22
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Zealand
  • Interests:Juggling, Unicycling

Posted 2008-December-10, 14:35

Yes I need something.

I will bid 2♠ with something that looks like a decent weak two.

(A bit stronger over a weak 1NT where game is still possible).
Wayne Burrows

I believe that the USA currently hold only the World Championship For People Who Still Bid Like Your Auntie Gladys - dburn
dunno how to play 4 card majors - JLOGIC
True but I know Standard American and what better reason could I have for playing Precision? - Hideous Hog
Bidding is an estimation of probabilities SJ Simon

#4 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 2008-December-10, 17:21

When the opponents open 1NT and are vulnerable, every honor you add increases you chances of gaining a 200-point set even when 1NT is not doubled, and at a faster rate than your chances of making game. If you only beat them 100, your chance of making a partscore are lower (when you have a fairly flat hand).

I don't know where the line is, when looking at 6322 shape, but it ain't a 0-count.
"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

#5 User is offline   Fluffy 

  • World International Master without a clue
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,404
  • Joined: 2003-November-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:madrid

Posted 2008-December-10, 18:41

0 count is so likelly to get you to hopeless game if you reopen, I'd say the minimun should be KJxxxx
BridgeGod: my personal website with interactive problems and articles
0

#6 User is offline   gnasher 

  • Andy Bowles
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 11,993
  • Joined: 2007-May-03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 2008-December-11, 08:07

I'd need about KQJxxx and nothing, or QJ9xxx and an ace. I want partner to be able to judge sensibly in the event of further competition.
... that would still not be conclusive proof, before someone wants to explain that to me as well as if I was a 5 year-old. - gwnn
0

#7 User is offline   mtvesuvius 

  • Vesuvius the Violent Volcano
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,216
  • Joined: 2008-December-04
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tampa-Area, Florida
  • Interests:SLEEPING

Posted 2008-December-11, 08:29

Yes... I want a least some sort of redeeming value. Partner shouldn't punish you for balancing, but at this vulnerability 2♠ is tempting. RHO probably has 6 or 7 HCP, and partner is endplayed on opening lead. If my partner won't punish me for balancing, then I reluctantly bid 2♠. Otherwise, I pass. (Also, what systems are we playing over 1NT... Did partner have a penalty double available??)

AJK
Yay for the "Ignored Users" feature!
0

#8 User is offline   jdonn 

  • - - T98765432 AQT8
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 15,085
  • Joined: 2005-June-23
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Las Vegas, NV

Posted 2008-December-11, 10:11

Serious question: Would anyone bid on the hand with nothing if partner was barred fro the auction?
Please let me know about any questions or interest or bug reports about GIB.
0

#9 User is offline   gnasher 

  • Andy Bowles
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 11,993
  • Joined: 2007-May-03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 2008-December-11, 10:30

jdonn, on Dec 11 2008, 05:11 PM, said:

Serious question: Would anyone bid on the hand with nothing if partner was barred fro the auction?

If partner were both barred and unlimited, and RHO didn't know that this was our agreement, we could expect partner to have something like a balanced 16-count or more, with 17 or 18 being more likely. Do I want to bid 2♠ opposite that? Yes, I suppose so.
... that would still not be conclusive proof, before someone wants to explain that to me as well as if I was a 5 year-old. - gwnn
0

#10 User is offline   dake50 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,211
  • Joined: 2006-April-22

Posted 2008-December-11, 10:33

Trap-passing partner heard me not double. So he should let 2S play. Incidentally, I xfer as if opened here. so 2H->2S for trap passer to play.
0

#11 User is offline   Fluffy 

  • World International Master without a clue
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,404
  • Joined: 2003-November-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:madrid

Posted 2008-December-11, 10:39

About your question Josh, I need to know something about RHO, if its a LOL I reopen for sure, if its a tricky player that might want me to reopen, then I would think it more.
BridgeGod: my personal website with interactive problems and articles
0

#12 User is offline   kgr 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,442
  • Joined: 2003-April-11

Posted 2008-December-11, 16:38

Thanks all for the answers.
I had this kind of hand non-vul (not sure if opps wer vuln) at MP's. I had some HCP's - like 5 - and maybe a singleton ♥ (...looks like I'mm changing the conditions here).
I passed and saw that everybody till then was in 2 or 3♠ making 4.
Partner had 13 HCP.
PS: we play multi-landy with penalty DBL over 1NT.
http://bss2html.atspace.cc/
0

#13 User is offline   OleBerg 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,950
  • Joined: 2008-April-05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Copenhagen
  • Interests:Model-Railways.

Posted 2008-December-11, 17:16

jdonn, on Dec 11 2008, 06:11 PM, said:

Serious question: Would anyone bid on the hand with nothing if partner was barred fro the auction?

I would.

Non-vulnerable it is a wtp? (For me :D )

Edit: Assuming 15-17, or that partner wouldnt double with 14.
_____________________________________

Do not underestimate the power of the dark side. Or the ninth trumph.

Best Regards Ole Berg

_____________________________________

We should always assume 2/1 unless otherwise stated, because:

- If the original poster didn't bother to state his system, that means that he thinks it's obvious what he's playing. The only people who think this are 2/1 players.

Gnasher
0

#14 User is offline   han 

  • Under bidder
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 11,797
  • Joined: 2004-July-25
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Amsterdam, the Netherlands

Posted 2008-December-11, 17:46

I also would Josh.
Please note: I am interested in boring, bog standard, 2/1.

- hrothgar
0

#15 User is offline   Echognome 

  • Deipnosophist
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,386
  • Joined: 2005-March-22

Posted 2008-December-11, 18:39

So is the solution to make an insufficient artificial call (such as 1♦, since 2♦ would be artificial in their system) and then correct it to 2♠ thus banning partner? :D :D :blink: B)
"Half the people you know are below average." - Steven Wright
0

#16 User is offline   Codo 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,373
  • Joined: 2003-March-15
  • Location:Hamburg, Germany
  • Interests:games and sports, esp. bridge,chess and (beach-)volleyball

Posted 2008-December-12, 01:54

Echognome, on Dec 12 2008, 09:39 AM, said:

So is the solution to make an insufficient artificial call (such as 1♦, since 2♦ would be artificial in their system) and then correct it to 2♠ thus banning partner? :D :) :) B)

Good idea, but unluckily not possible in the good new online world.
Here you need a more sensible way.
Kind Regards

Roland

Sanity Check: Failure (Fluffy)
More system is not the answer...
0

#17 User is offline   OleBerg 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,950
  • Joined: 2008-April-05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Copenhagen
  • Interests:Model-Railways.

Posted 2008-December-12, 02:08

Codo, on Dec 12 2008, 09:54 AM, said:

Echognome, on Dec 12 2008, 09:39 AM, said:

So is the solution to make an insufficient artificial call (such as 1♦, since 2♦ would be artificial in their system) and then correct it to 2♠ thus banning partner?  :D  :rolleyes:  :blink:  B)

Good idea, but unluckily not possible in the good new online world.
Here you need a more sensible way.

Not possible with screens either.

And even without screens, a competent director will invoke §23.
_____________________________________

Do not underestimate the power of the dark side. Or the ninth trumph.

Best Regards Ole Berg

_____________________________________

We should always assume 2/1 unless otherwise stated, because:

- If the original poster didn't bother to state his system, that means that he thinks it's obvious what he's playing. The only people who think this are 2/1 players.

Gnasher
0

#18 User is offline   helene_t 

  • The Abbess
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,394
  • Joined: 2004-April-22
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Odense, Denmark
  • Interests:History, languages

Posted 2008-December-12, 02:14

I have a theory that it's safer to balance the weaker your hand is. Since the more strength you can infer partner must have, the more likely he is to be balanced, i.e. have some tolerance for your suit. Since with values and shape, he would have bid.

Of course this assumes that partner is not going to expect anything other than shape from your balancing action.
The world would be such a happy place, if only everyone played Acol :) --- TramTicket
0
Page 1 of 1
  • 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