This hand is open for discussion
BPO-006E
#2
Posted 2005-October-07, 09:54
I'm bidding 2C and correcting the expected 2H response to 3S. Partner will (should?) understand that I'm interested in quick tricks and controls rather than “points”. If I'm lucky enough to hear 2S, then I'm blasting to 4S.
#3
Posted 2005-October-07, 10:06
This shows an unbalanced invite, partner should degrade minor honors in side suits.
- hrothgar
#4
Posted 2005-October-07, 10:12
Winston
#5 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2005-October-07, 10:14
#6
Posted 2005-October-07, 10:15
Arend
#7
Posted 2005-October-07, 10:15
- hrothgar
#8
Posted 2005-October-07, 10:20
Jlall, on Oct 7 2005, 11:14 AM, said:
Odd. I would think 2D followed by 3S as forcing. I've never played the direct jump as anything but invitational - but then I'm used to playing 2C as the only force, regardless of the opening bid so what do I know?
#9
Posted 2005-October-07, 10:28
2D followed by 3S is gameforcing of course (as 2D is gameforcing), but it does not guarantee slam interest. It also doesn't guarantee a great spade suit.
- hrothgar
#10
Posted 2005-October-07, 10:29
PS I play it both ways (but not with the same partners)
#11
Posted 2005-October-07, 10:35
1) A direct jump to 3♠
2) 2♣ followed by 2/3♠
3) Would anyone suggest 2NT (presumably a tranfer to 3♣ followed by 3♠ and if so, what would that show?
I doubt we will get answers to all of these questions, but who knows. For what it is worth, Fred's view here is that a direct 3♠ rebid here is not forcing in BBO Advanced. Matts & Pamela Granovetter write up on xyz described all three level rebids by responder as "forcing" except for 3♣, which they play as signoff (their respnder 2NT is invitational). Others play 2NT response as the transfer to 3♣ as signoff in clubs, or one of several other hand types (if don't pass 3♣.
I will not say, yet, rather Fred went with 3♠ or something more exotic. But my choosing this problem was in an attempt to help define the boundries of the meaning of some of the xyz follow ups. If not directly from the experts initial response then from the subsequent discussion.
Ben
#12
Posted 2005-October-07, 10:39
Jlall, on Oct 7 2005, 12:14 PM, said:
That seems standard to me, but then I am biased, as that is the way I play it. BTW, when this hand was played in the Grov Cup (I beleive), it was played in 2♠ at one table and 4♠ at the other after the first three bids given in the problem. One player evaluated the hand as being worht a 4♠ bid (and as you will see, so did a fair number of panelist), the ohter player considered it worthy of only a signoff in 2♠.
#13
Posted 2005-October-07, 10:40
If everyone agrees that this hand evaluates as an invitation with spades*, doesn't the problem just become "what's the system bid?" rather than judgement-related?
*of course, this is almost certainly not the case, so ignore my point.
#14
Posted 2005-October-07, 10:42
inquiry, on Oct 7 2005, 06:35 PM, said:
I know this has been discussed before, but I will say it once more: In my opinion, when we want to know whether 3♠ is forcing in BBO advanced, we should make a poll and ask whether 3♠ is/should be forcing. A bidding poll should be for discussion of judgement, or sometimes bidding strategies, given a fixed set of agreements.
#15
Posted 2005-October-07, 10:49
cherdano, on Oct 7 2005, 12:42 PM, said:
inquiry, on Oct 7 2005, 06:35 PM, said:
I know this has been discussed before, but I will say it once more: In my opinion, when we want to know whether 3♠ is forcing in BBO advanced, we should make a poll and ask whether 3♠ is/should be forcing. A bidding poll should be for discussion of judgement, or sometimes bidding strategies, given a fixed set of agreements.
Well, lets assume for the sake of arguement, that we already know that 3♠ is invitational (I think that would be a mistake, 3♠ should be ♠ and slam invite, but ok... sake of arguement).
That still doesn't mean 3♠ is right bid. Why? Because there would be in theory four possible ways to invite in spades..
1x-1S
1N-3S
1x-1S
1N-2C
2D-2S
1x-1S
1N-2C
2D-3S
1x-1S
1N-2N
3C-3S
Now, with the great limit on the nature of the 1NT rebid, you probably will never need four ways to invite, but clearly there must be some difference between 2C followed by 3♠ and a direct 3♠. Just setting up a poll to discover if 3♠ is forcing or not would not get to the heart of the matter (at least in my opinion). Perhaps a better way is to pick some well describe xzy-write up on the web and say, "here - this is the way BBO Advanced plays xzy" and then invite the panelist to complain if the write up is deficient.
#16
Posted 2005-October-07, 10:52
1C-1S
1N-2C
2D-3S
However, there is a need to differentiate these hands:
K9xxxx, xx, AQxx, x
AKJ9xx, xxx, xx, Qx
I always used the checkback in checkback as a checkback - looking for a fit or help in the suit. If I have a good suit, I don't need to check.
Winston
#17 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2005-October-07, 10:54
#18
Posted 2005-October-07, 10:55
inquiry, on Oct 7 2005, 11:35 AM, said:
1) A direct jump to 3♠
2) 2♣ followed by 2/3♠
3) Would anyone suggest 2NT (presumably a tranfer to 3♣ followed by 3♠ and if so, what would that show?
I doubt we will get answers to all of these questions, but who knows. For what it is worth, Fred's view here is that a direct 3♠ rebid here is not forcing in BBO Advanced. Matts & Pamela Granovetter write up on xyz described all three level rebids by responder as "forcing" except for 3♣, which they play as signoff (their respnder 2NT is invitational). Others play 2NT response as the transfer to 3♣ as signoff in clubs, or one of several other hand types (if don't pass 3♣.
I will not say, yet, rather Fred went with 3♠ or something more exotic. But my choosing this problem was in an attempt to help define the boundries of the meaning of some of the xyz follow ups. If not directly from the experts initial response then from the subsequent discussion.
Ben
I was not sure how we play direct 3s. Ben, if I remember the BBO notes do not say XYZ, in fact the notes seem to say a direct 3minor bid is not forcing, in XYZ a direct 3d bid would be forcing.
1c=1s
1nt=3d forcing in xyz but not in bbo advanced notes it seems.
1d=1s
1nt=3d=forcing in xyz but not in bbo advanced notes it seems.
"After 1 of a minor-1 of a major-1NT, 2♣ = Invitational checkback, 2♦ = Forcing checkback, 3 of minor = To play."
#19
Posted 2005-October-07, 10:57
Jlall, on Oct 7 2005, 11:54 AM, said:
Only thing that kept me from 4 spades was the lousy shape.
Winston
#20
Posted 2005-October-07, 10:57
Jlall, on Oct 7 2005, 11:54 AM, said:
It was very close, but I decided to invite. I like the style in which an invite says: accept unless you have a reason not to. If your style is accept if you have a reason to, then I bid 4♠
BPO-00E
Pard You
1♣ 1♠
1NT ?
Partner opens 1♣ and over your 1♠ response, rebids 1NT (opponents silent)