BBO Discussion Forums: 2/1 IMPS GA AKxx QT AKxxxx x - BBO Discussion Forums

 MrAce, on 2016-December-29, 11:18, said:

Same here. (And for hands without a major)

Rik

I don't get this.

Suppose you have the East had and partner opens a strong (15-17) 1NT. Wouldn't you at least be tempted to look for a major suit game?

In this case, West has shown 15-17 HCPs, a four card spade suit, an unbalanced hand with a diamond suit, and either short hearts or clubs, where either shortness fits your hand well. That is one and a half trick better than when West opens 1NT. Even if 3♠ wouldn't be forcing (not my idea) I would bid 4♠ without blinking, certainly at IMPs.

Rik

 nekthen, on 2016-December-29, 04:04, said:

4 spades can't possibly be right because it leaves partner no room to cue. imo it's either 3c or 3s depending on whether 3s is forcing (for me it is)

 nige1, on 2016-December-29, 12:07, said:

geez east pass of 3s is crazy. I would raise with the east hand after 2s.

My only guess is that east thought he did not have a neg x over 2c and that he already had overbid.

 mike777, on 2016-December-29, 12:46, said:

raising after 2s would be a mistake, your partner is showing a minimum hand and you have no extras.

 eagles123, on 2016-December-29, 12:47, said:

no 2s does not promise only a minimum....we strongly disagree here. in any case across from my minimums we have an easy game try...perhaps not the junk you open on ...


If east is forbidden to raise to 3s with this collection then put me down for my option2 bid of 3c.

 Kaitlyn S, on 2016-December-29, 10:29, said:

"Standard expert" is that 3S is 98% forcing.

Cheers,
mike

 mike777, on 2016-December-29, 12:50, said:

If 2S doesn't show a minimum (up to a nice 15), then what do you do with a hand like:

AKxx
xxx
QJxx
Kx

You have no bid. 2s has to show a minumum with (hopefully) 4S.

 Trinidad, on 2016-December-29, 12:37, said:

I agree. Passing with the E hand shows bad judgement.

It seems to me that east has an automatic pass if west rebids 2S. He has already shown his hand by doubling. West could hold a balanced 12-14 count, for which 2S is more than enough. For example Kxxx Qx AKxx xxx. West is vastly better than this so is well worth 3C followed by 3S if east bids 3D or 3H.

 cherdano, on 2016-December-28, 16:42, said:

I agree with Cherdano and feel pretty strongly that 3C is right. With a 5-loser hand we cannot bid quietly, but we cannot force partner to hold 4S, either, as he was under pressure to show some values. Worst case we end up in 4D on a 6-2.

One thing I learned from this game is you cannot force partner to hold specific hands, especially when he is under pressure, so the best bid is the one that does not punish partner for imperfect holdings.

For what it is worth, Marshall Miles in "Competitive Bidding in the 21st Century" gives this as an example of a 2S rebid after 1D-(2C); AJx xxx Kxxx AJx. This is of course an extreme example, but does illustrate that the 2S bid shows minimum values. It is certainly not a reverse, as some other posters have implied.

 GrahamJson, on 2016-December-30, 11:35, said:

it's easy to show that 2S being a reverse is silly. This would force opener to bid 2D of 2NT on all minimum hands when responder implies majors.

Having checked a few sources, all seem to agree that a cue bid is the only forcing continuation by opener after a negative double. To play a jump rebid, 3S in the above example, as forcing must surely make a simple rebid have far too wide a range. Incidentally, Miles also mentions that a negative double at the two level should show a minimum of a 9 count, making the east hand above a dead minimum.

 Kaitlyn S, on 2016-December-30, 12:19, said:

Whosoever this Marshal is,he is definitely not living in 21st century !On reading all the discussion on this hand he wii certainly refund all those who have purchased his book.It appears that the so called negative doubles are actually " unusual positive " bids.No one has anywhere mentioned as to how many total losers be there or even the number of losers in the major suits based hand.The definition must also extend to single suited ' negative doubles' .Is there a common agreed understanding if responder had bid 2H/S or 3H/S and the same bids after making a negative double?
Unless and until these are worked out not only on HCP limits but also on the losers in the hand and" defined "clearly there are bound to be multiple opinions on the problems posed not only on today's hands but many dissimilar hands in the future too.On today's hand if opener bids 3 Spade how can it be nonforcing? And if somebody says so then is it an invitational bid? What are the requirements for responder to bid 4S if 3S is invitational? Although not very pleasing,3S bid appears to be the only choice left for this hand,

Marshall Miles. Yeah, never heard of him either. Gave him a SAYC card once, though, and told him he was playing it until he had at least one acceptable CC.

So, no he is not living in the 21st century, but he did for most of it - and was a bridge writer of the top level. Yes, potentially a little idiosyncratic...

It is possible - I realize this might be a stretch, but it's true - to use other evaluation methods than Losing Trick Count(*). Especially if you're a world champion who has played more hands of bridge in a year - for 50 years - than I have in my lifetime. LTC is a great idea, especially when it's not the one and only way to evaluate, and leaned on heavily with a fit and discounted without one. I'd value my partner's judgment over any counting method, though, if my partner was in the Hall of Fame. Of course, if he told me to evaluate with a standard counting method so he could judge properly, I'd be all for it!

Also, I assume the auction in question is after 1♦-(2♣)-X-(p).

(*) Note applies to HCP, Total Tricks, Zar, K/R, ...

 msjennifer, on 2016-December-30, 13:38, said:

There are 4 types of posters here, and people in life too.

1-those who don't know that they don't know;
2-those who know that they don't know;
3-those who don't know that they know;
4-and those who know that they know.

They all have their own annoying effects to some degree but among them the people in 1st group are the ones who embarrasses themselves the most!

Marshall Miles. R.I.P, was a bridge player whose knowledge in his little toe is something you will never achieve in your entire life. But you do not know that either, because someone taught you LTC instead of bridge and you are living the dream that you solved it all!

I have one of Marshall Miles books - I don't particularly like it, seemed a lot of "this is what you should bid" and lo and behold partner has the perfecto to match the suggested bid. I'm sure he was a great player I just wasn't a huge fan of the book of his I read.

ps i made a poll on bridge winners for whether 3s is forcing or not: http://bridgewinners...t-2-mnikbh3y2q/