[the hog]

I think 2S is sick, almost as sick as 1NT. Don't tell me you are one of those nutters that play 1S shows 5 and X shows 4 here? What a chronic waste of a bid!

[the hog]

Mbe, but seriously who plays that these days? Not in serious bridge anyway

[whereagles]

are you saying sayc and 2/1 is not "serious bridge", hog?

[the hog]

Funny that. Here I would regard anyone who plays that as an easy mark. In Poland no one plays it as well. Think of the wasted hands you can show.

[the hog]

Agree - even better to have 1S show -ve X

[Flame]

HeartA, on Oct 25 2004, 11:03 PM, said:

Flame, on Oct 25 2004, 09:29 PM, said:

About the partscore argument, i strongly disagree with Ron, 1NT is a great partscore and will make more times then 2d/2c, and also get more points for an overtrick. also 2c is very likely to get us higher in clubs or diamonds, partner will fight for the contract, and will enaluate his hand wrong.

If 1NT becomes the final contract, it is OK with me. My problem is, what if pd has a hand (almost) strong enough to force to game? I know, you would say "pd then should check back if I really have I stopper". To me, it is absurd to check back while my NT already says stopper. And I hate too much gadgets which takes away the natural meanings of some bids. When I bid (1)NT, I guarantee stopper (at least Kx or Qxx). And if pd wants to check on slam, he will know I have some honor(s) on opp's suit. For the hand given on the thread, I will bid 2C and apologize to pd if it leads to a bad contract.

You dont need to many gadget, nothing is easier, just agree 1nt doesnt promiss a stop and the rest will be clear and easy. yes if you dont want to agree on that you have a problem and start laying.

[whereagles]

Actually, there are many schemes one can use here, such as

1D (1H) ...
X = any balanced hand
1S = nat 4+
1NT = clubs
2C = good raise of diams
2D = trash raise
etc..

[HeartA]

Flame, on Oct 26 2004, 09:29 AM, said:

You dont need to many gadget, nothing is easier, just agree 1nt doesnt promiss a stop and the rest will be clear and easy. yes if you dont want to agree on that you have a problem and start laying.

I don't have a problem at all. I will have problem when I bid NT while opps can take the first 5 or more tricks. I lied about the length of ♣ this time by one card, and I don't think it is a bigger problem than lying about stopper. I accept the reality that no bidding system is perfect. There are always counter-example to show a bidding is "bad".

Besides, if I would know pd's hand is limited, I don't have to bid at all (I have to bid PASS). I am forced to bid because there is pontential for game, and 3NT is a very likely one. If my pd jumps to 3NT after my 1NT and opps get the first 5 or more tricks, I am the one to blame.

[junyi_zhu]

Jlall, on Oct 26 2004, 01:09 PM, said:

wow, im surprised im the only 2S bidder here. Is it really so bad to raise partner in a sure 7 card fit with Ace doubleton and a prime hand? I think 2C is sick with 4-3 in the minors and is a GROSS distortion. 1N is a very reasonable call, and good easily be the winner

I think 1NT and 2S are close, 1NT describes the shape well, however, when you hold xxxx in opps' suit, you often belong to suits, even if partner has a stopper, he might not
be able to duck it, xxx facing Kxx, partner may duck it and cut the communication, xxxx facing Kx, partner has to win K on the first trick and opps still probably have their communication. but change xxxx to Txxx or even 9xxx, the situation may change dramatically, because opps may be blocked in the suit.

[jtfanclub]

HeartA, on Oct 26 2004, 11:39 AM, said:

I lied about the length of ♣ this time by one card, and I don't think it is a bigger problem than lying about stopper.

If you're lying about one card, sure. But you're lying about two. 1♦ followed by 2♣ promises 9 cards in the minors. You have seven.

If I bid 2♠ and that only promises three, then I'm only lying about 1 card. If I rebid 2♦ and that can be a 5 card suit if I have heart length and no heart strength (eg 2452 distribution) then I'm only lying about one card.

I wouldn't want a partner who lied by two cards over lying by one at the same level. Sorry.

[flytoox]

The_Hog, on Oct 26 2004, 02:08 PM, said:

Funny that. Here I would regard anyone who plays that as an easy mark. In Poland no one plays it as well. Think of the wasted hands you can show.

I think you are a bit biased. If I am right, Mike Lawrence said x shows 4 and 1s shows 5 is the majority in expert circle.

From the logic perspective, isnt it findig the spade fit the most important thing in contested auction? Isnt it a lot helpful if u know pd have 4 or 5+spade if you need to make the decision at the three level? We all dont mind to raise to 2 with 3card in contested auction, but 3 level is another story.


I agree that playing x denies spade has its merit, but definitely not so much as u claimed.

[flytoox]

I think 2c here goes a bit far. I would painfully bid 1N. I dont think the chance that pd raise to 3N is much. I dont have much worry other this. SO i will go with 1N.