run forrest
#1
Posted 2010-August-17, 16:23
xxxx
xxx
xx
xxxx
(1♦)-1NT-(x)-?
you can either bid 2♣ clubs and another or pass.
1♦ could have been as short as two cards (11-15)
George Carlin
#4
Posted 2010-August-17, 16:32
#5
Posted 2010-August-17, 17:14
Forrest Gump: It happens.
Bumper Sticker guy: What, *****?
Forrest Gump: Sometimes.
#6
Posted 2010-August-17, 18:19
The potential upside to a 2♣ call seems obvious.
The downside, however, is that partner might have six diamonds or five hearts and end up in the wrong contract if you bid 2♣.
Pass gets you to the right contract anyway if partner is expected to bid here and elects clubs or spades. So, pass only might hurt if partner bids 2D or 2H. If partner never bids 2♥ in this sequence, then only 2♦ causes problems, and that might not be a problem if he only bids 2♦ with five of them, as there may be no better fit anyway, in that event.
In other words, the fact that I have 4-4 in clubs and spades does not automatically mean that I should show a two-suited hand with 4-4 in the two suits.
-P.J. Painter.
#7
Posted 2010-August-17, 18:22
kenrexford, on Aug 17 2010, 07:19 PM, said:
The potential upside to a 2♣ call seems obvious.
The downside, however, is that partner might have six diamonds or five hearts and end up in the wrong contract if you bid 2♣.
Pass gets you to the right contract anyway if partner is expected to bid here and elects clubs or spades. So, pass only might hurt if partner bids 2D or 2H. If partner never bids 2♥ in this sequence, then only 2♦ causes problems, and that might not be a problem if he only bids 2♦ with five of them, as there may be no better fit anyway, in that event.
In other words, the fact that I have 4-4 in clubs and spades does not automatically mean that I should show a two-suited hand with 4-4 in the two suits.
But consider if you bid 2♣ LHO might double. That would help a lot in two ways:
- Partner could bid his own suit now or elect to hear our other suit, giving us the most options possible.
- If partner redoubles to get us out of 2♣ we could show just about our exact shape (bid 2♦ then redouble to suggest both majors with better spades).
#8
Posted 2010-August-18, 01:07
#9
Posted 2010-August-18, 02:38
The_Hog, on Aug 18 2010, 08:07 AM, said:
I couldn't have said it better.
#10
Posted 2010-August-18, 06:51
jdonn, on Aug 17 2010, 07:22 PM, said:
kenrexford, on Aug 17 2010, 07:19 PM, said:
The potential upside to a 2♣ call seems obvious.
The downside, however, is that partner might have six diamonds or five hearts and end up in the wrong contract if you bid 2♣.
Pass gets you to the right contract anyway if partner is expected to bid here and elects clubs or spades. So, pass only might hurt if partner bids 2D or 2H. If partner never bids 2♥ in this sequence, then only 2♦ causes problems, and that might not be a problem if he only bids 2♦ with five of them, as there may be no better fit anyway, in that event.
In other words, the fact that I have 4-4 in clubs and spades does not automatically mean that I should show a two-suited hand with 4-4 in the two suits.
But consider if you bid 2♣ LHO might double. That would help a lot in two ways:
- Partner could bid his own suit now or elect to hear our other suit, giving us the most options possible.
- If partner redoubles to get us out of 2♣ we could show just about our exact shape (bid 2♦ then redouble to suggest both majors with better spades).
Yeah, but if I pass, Opener might bid. If Opener doesn't bid, Partner might redouble. If partner redouibles, and I then bid 2♣, that might be doubled, and then I get to show even MORE detail.
I'm just saying, the escape scenario is not particularly obvious unless one goes through the entire structure of possible developments.
-P.J. Painter.
#12
Posted 2010-August-18, 07:49
#13
Posted 2010-August-18, 16:02
-P.J. Painter.
#14
Posted 2010-August-18, 16:11
#15
Posted 2010-August-18, 16:36
Well:
http://www.bridgeaholics.com/bidding/gadge...cowrunouts.html
Now, in THAT write-up of Moscow Escape, no definition is given for a pass.
In this write-up pass expresses willingness to play 1NT doubled:
http://omahabridge.o...ak_Notrumps.pdf
But see this write-up:
http://www.bridgeguys.com/pdf/Precision/PC...capeSystems.pdf
In this one, Moscow Escapes include a pass that is forcing. But, that "Moscow Escapes" description does not even remotely look like what I remember. However, see "Meckwell Escapes."
The mere fact, then, that pass is an option, without explaining what pass means, does not necessarily mean that pass means willingness to play there.
It might. But, it might not. since 2♣ showing clubs and spades is obviously part of a special agreement, and since pass is often defined in those types of special agreements, the lack of definition of the pass cannot mean "must be to play" as the obvious default. Rather, it likely means something in the context of whichever escape system was in play.
-P.J. Painter.
#16
Posted 2010-August-18, 17:52
Quote
he really meant
Quote
#17
Posted 2010-August-18, 17:56
-P.J. Painter.
#18
Posted 2010-August-18, 18:15
#19
Posted 2010-August-18, 18:19
#20
Posted 2010-August-18, 18:20
kenrexford, on Aug 17 2010, 07:19 PM, said:
Partner can overcall 2♦ (natural) with six the way I play.
I don't think I need to opine about what partner's options are with five hearts.
Winner - BBO Challenge bracket #6 - February, 2017.

Help
