BBO Discussion Forums: Your bid - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Your bid 2/1 ACBL

Poll: bid after reverse (21 member(s) have cast votes)

bid after reverse

  1. 3 clubs (4 votes [19.05%])

    Percentage of vote: 19.05%

  2. 3 diamonds (2 votes [9.52%])

    Percentage of vote: 9.52%

  3. 3 spades (15 votes [71.43%])

    Percentage of vote: 71.43%

  4. something else (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 User is offline   dickiegera 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 568
  • Joined: 2009-July-12
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ohio

Posted 2014-August-18, 06:22

|2NT is liebenshol asking for a 3 club bid


Should East bid 3 or something else?

Thank you

0

#2 User is offline   helene_t 

  • The Abbess
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,068
  • Joined: 2004-April-22
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:UK

Posted 2014-August-18, 06:25

Something is wrong. Presumably it was west who bid 2nt. But I can't imagine that east passed on the previous round

If I bid 2h on the previous round I bid 3sp now
The world would be such a happy place, if only everyone played Acol :) --- TramTicket
1

#3 User is offline   dickiegera 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 568
  • Joined: 2009-July-12
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ohio

Posted 2014-August-18, 07:35

View Posthelene_t, on 2014-August-18, 06:25, said:

Something is wrong. Presumably it was west who bid 2nt. But I can't imagine that east passed on the previous round

If I bid 2h on the previous round I bid 3sp now



I corrected the bidding Thank You
0

#4 User is offline   P_Marlowe 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,029
  • Joined: 2005-March-18
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2014-August-18, 07:59

East bids 3C, if he is content to stop in a partial.

I am forcing to game, hence I show my card support for partners suit.

With kind regards
Marlowe
With kind regards
Uwe Gebhardt (P_Marlowe)
0

#5 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 2014-August-18, 08:49

This is an interesting situational problem, mostly because there is an interesting situational solution. When you have this specific auction, and only this specific auction, one could use a completion of 3 rather than 3 as an artificial means of showing a spade fragment but a minimal reverse (with stronger values just bid 3). This keeps the auction below Opener's two suits, in the event that Responder has some garbage hand with only four spades (possibly lousy ones) with diamond support, e.g., xxxx xxx Kxx Qxx? 3, instead, would deny three spades.
"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

#6 User is offline   Zelandakh 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,666
  • Joined: 2006-May-18
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 2014-August-18, 09:13

If going for artificial solutions, would RR transfers not be a better option Ken?
(-: Zel :-)

Happy New Year everyone!
0

#7 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 2014-August-18, 11:44

View PostZelandakh, on 2014-August-18, 09:13, said:

If going for artificial solutions, would RR transfers not be a better option Ken?


What are "RR transfers?"
"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

#8 User is offline   aguahombre 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 12,029
  • Joined: 2009-February-21
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:St. George, UT

Posted 2014-August-18, 12:12

View Postkenrexford, on 2014-August-18, 08:49, said:

This is an interesting situational problem, mostly because there is an interesting situational solution. When you have this specific auction, and only this specific auction, one could use a completion of 3 rather than 3 as an artificial means of showing a spade fragment but a minimal reverse (with stronger values just bid 3). This keeps the auction below Opener's two suits, in the event that Responder has some garbage hand with only four spades (possibly lousy ones) with diamond support, e.g., xxxx xxx Kxx Qxx? 3, instead, would deny three spades.

Although the example you provided would/should pass 1, the idea of 3 willing to be passed is a valid one in use by us. The inference of holding 3 cards in Spades is unnessary if the Leb 2NT itself denies a weak response with 5+ Spades.

Fancy transfers don't seem to gain over natural. With hands which are too strong to bid 3D, we can bid semi-naturally also.
"Bidding Spades to show spades can work well." (Kenberg)
0

#9 User is offline   akwoo 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,309
  • Joined: 2010-November-21

Posted 2014-August-18, 12:22

This depends on what your (implied) agreements about partner's strength are.

If partner always has a full 6 hcp for the 1 bid and 2N includes every 7 hcp hand, I'd bid 3.

On the other hand, I think the modern tendency is that partner can have a hand as bad as

Qxxx xx x Kxxxxx

and would have bid 3 with

xxxx x AQxx xxxx

in which case I think 3 is enough.
0

#10 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 2014-August-18, 12:39

View Postaguahombre, on 2014-August-18, 12:12, said:

Although the example you provided would/should pass 1, the idea of 3 willing to be passed is a valid one. The inference of holding 3 cards in Spades is unnessary if the Leb 2NT itself denies a weak response with 5+ Spades.


This is not precisely correct, for a somewhat nuanced reason, beyond the possibility of a Moysian.

Consider Opener's decision at the first instance to reverse. I would imagine that the minimum needed for a reverse is lower if Opener has fragmentary spade support, right? I mean, your minimum reverse with 3-4-5-1 is lower than the minimum reverse with 1-4-5-3, surely? If this is true, then a 3 call to show that "barely a reverse because you bid spades" hand, and to isolate out a minimum with a stiff or void in clubs, might be a good thing.



"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

#11 User is offline   aguahombre 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 12,029
  • Joined: 2009-February-21
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:St. George, UT

Posted 2014-August-18, 14:24

View Postkenrexford, on 2014-August-18, 12:39, said:

This is not precisely correct, for a somewhat nuanced reason, beyond the possibility of a Moysian.

Consider Opener's decision at the first instance to reverse. I would imagine that the minimum needed for a reverse is lower if Opener has fragmentary spade support, right? I mean, your minimum reverse with 3-4-5-1 is lower than the minimum reverse with 1-4-5-3, surely? If this is true, then a 3 call to show that "barely a reverse because you bid spades" hand, and to isolate out a minimum with a stiff or void in clubs, might be a good thing.

Nope, we tuck in and bid 2S which normally promises 4 of them if we are below reverse strength.
"Bidding Spades to show spades can work well." (Kenberg)
0

#12 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 2014-August-18, 15:46

View Postaguahombre, on 2014-August-18, 14:24, said:

Nope, we tuck in and bid 2S which normally promises 4 of them if we are below reverse strength.

OK.
"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

#13 User is offline   gszes 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,653
  • Joined: 2011-February-12

Posted 2014-August-18, 16:54

There will undoubtedly be a hand or two where playing 3c is right and I will pay off to those
by hearing my p 4c bid which I will pass. Even opposite 4 small spades there is quite a bit of
potential here and I am not going quietly into the night when prospects for game are this good.

3s

I do not consider 3s as game forcing but an offer to play there if responder has nothing better
to do. The added benefit of 3s is that it focuses on the singleton club and the main reason
1n opening and/or a 2n rebid was avoided.
0

#14 User is offline   Zelandakh 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,666
  • Joined: 2006-May-18
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 2014-August-19, 03:14

View Postkenrexford, on 2014-August-18, 11:44, said:

What are "RR transfers?"

I just meant Responder's Rebid. :)
(-: Zel :-)

Happy New Year everyone!
0

#15 User is offline   fromageGB 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,679
  • Joined: 2008-April-06

Posted 2014-August-19, 03:52

Certainly I bid 3.

I suppose it depends on what standards you adopt for a reverse, but this hand is nothing exceptional. I am not familiar with the use of Lebensohl after a reverse, preferring transfers, but if this 2NT would imply a 4216 shape 5 or 6 count, then 3 has a better chance of making than 4. Surely a better responder club hand would be bidding a natural 3 forcing.

Similarly if Lebensohl 2NT is used as a precursor to playing in 3, then you look really silly going off in 4 when 3 is the only making contract when partner is a 6 count 4333 such as Jxxx, xxx, Qxx, Kxx.
0

#16 User is offline   monikrazy 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 153
  • Joined: 2012-October-18

Posted 2014-August-19, 17:54

3 is an excellent bid here. Both 3S and 3D should be forcing to game or at least 4 of a minor, letting responder place the final contract.
0

#17 User is offline   Mbodell 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,871
  • Joined: 2007-April-22
  • Location:Santa Clara, CA

Posted 2014-August-20, 03:25

For me the 2nt bid denies a 5th spade. I have a good hand, but my reverse said that. I'll bid 3.
0

#18 User is offline   MrAce 

  • VIP Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,971
  • Joined: 2009-November-14
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Houston, TX

Posted 2014-August-21, 06:29

I like 3 spade but 3 club advocates made some good points that made me hesitate to decide.
"Genius has its own limitations, however stupidity has no such boundaries!"
"It's only when a mosquito lands on your testicles that you realize there is always a way to solve problems without using violence!"

"Well to be perfectly honest, in my humble opinion, of course without offending anyone who thinks differently from my point of view, but also by looking into this matter in a different perspective and without being condemning of one's view's and by trying to make it objectified, and by considering each and every one's valid opinion, I honestly believe that I completely forgot what I was going to say."





0

#19 User is offline   SteveMoe 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,168
  • Joined: 2012-May-17
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cincinnati Unit 124
  • Interests:Family, Travel, Bridge Tournaments and Writing. Youth Bridge

Posted 2014-August-22, 19:28

I like responder's 2 as weak with 5+ cards. This lets Lebensohl assure only 4-card holding.
Now 3 says no extras but can't stand (likely 0/1). This lets responder infer fragment. Opener's 3 is forward going (not have that hand here).
Be the partner you want to play with.
Trust demands integrity, balance and collaboration.
District 11
Unit 124
Steve Moese
0

#20 User is offline   Zelandakh 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,666
  • Joined: 2006-May-18
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 2014-August-24, 00:45

View PostSteveMoe, on 2014-August-22, 19:28, said:

I like responder's 2 as weak with 5+ cards. This lets Lebensohl assure only 4-card holding.

What is Responder doing with 5+ spades and enough for game? Presumably you have at least 4 sequences for 5 vs 6 spades and a club stop vs no stop. What Mobdell wrote (where 2 is forcing and not necessarily weak) is more mainstream. You can get away with a non-forcing 2 with some system but not many play it that way.
(-: Zel :-)

Happy New Year everyone!
0

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 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