[Winstonm]

luke warm, on Oct 9 2005, 06:03 PM, said:

as far as i know we have a diamond slam... partner will never believe my support is this good if i don't clue him in... just my opinion

It galls me but I have to agree with Jimmy.....

The first place to look when contemplating slam is the trump suit - if it ain't there you'd better tread carefully. How can the responding hand know that something like: Ax, Axx, 109xxx, AQx is worth a move unless we take strong action.

The 3 diamond bidders seem to think they will be able to catch up later; however, I believe partner will never visualize a hand this strong in support of diamonds when the 3 diamond bid could be: KQxxx, K, Kxxx, Kxx. If I splinter and then over 3S bid either 4S or 4D, it is apparent that a lot of my hand is in diamonds and I have a minimum splinter. If partner bids 3N, we must have wasted values in hearts that does not make a spade contract better opposite xx.

Looking at this from all sides, I have elevated my bid to the top scoring spot along with all my other bids and declare myself El Capito Perfecto - or just Perf to my friend(s?).



winston

[mike777]

Winstonm, on Oct 9 2005, 06:48 PM, said:

luke warm, on Oct 9 2005, 06:03 PM, said:

as far as i know we have a diamond slam... partner will never believe my support is this good if i don't clue him in... just my opinion

It galls me but I have to agree with Jimmy.....

The first place to look when contemplating slam is the trump suit - if it ain't there you'd better tread carefully. How can the responding hand know that something like: Ax, Axx, 109xxx, AQx is worth a move unless we take strong action.

from all sides, I have elevated my bid to the top scoring spot along with all my other bids and declare myself El Capito Perfecto - or just Perf to my friend(s?).



winston

Great example hand, over your 3nt rebid I bid 4s now showing a minimum 6-4 hand unsuitable for 3nt. Now partner will have to use judgement to pass or make slam try.

btw I think the "best" hand I can have is KJTxxx=xx=AKxx=x and the "worst" is KJxxxx=xx=AJxx=x

[Winstonm]

Would you 3 diamond bidders alter your choise at IMPs?

Winston

[Fluffy]

It seems everyone plays splinter for 3♥, well I don't, so that bid wouldn't come to my mind at all.

[whereagles]

Glad to see I'm not alone in my 2♠ bid.. lol.

[Chamaco]

I hate splintering just to show shortness if my values are concentrated in 2 suits.

Of course sometimes the splinter is the only real choice (to set trumps below game), but as a general rule I think the splinter should emphasize values in all the 3 suits, not just in 2 of them.

Here I have a perfectly valid alternative to a splinter, 3D (which I prefer to 4D, because I can go slower and learn more of pard's hand), so I'll bid 3D.

However, I can see how a 4D bid might work better than 3D.

[Walddk]

An additional point is that if you don't bid 3♦, you have lost the advantage of playing 2/1 GF where 2♦ was forcing to game. Playing Acol for instance, 3♦ is passable. This hand is too good for a non-forcing 3♦.

Roland

[Chamaco]

Walddk, on Oct 10 2005, 12:46 PM, said:

An additional point is that if you don't bid 3♦, you have lost the advantage of playing 2/1 GF where 2♦ was forcing to game. Playing Acol for instance, 3♦ is passable. This hand is too good for a non-forcing 3♦.

Roland

Sure, Roland you are right, I forgot to mention I assumed 2/1 GF.

Of course if 2D can be an invitational hand, then we need a forcing raise for diamonds and 3D is NF.

[Blofeld]

Not true, Roland. At least in traditional Acol, 2♥ would be non-forcing, so to splinter would take you to 4♥. So you gain a level in both cases.

Edit: oh, sorry ; if you were just contrasting 3♦ to 4♦ then in general I agree. Although the 4♦ call ought to show something.

[Walddk]

Blofeld, on Oct 10 2005, 02:48 PM, said:

Not true, Roland. At least in traditional Acol, 2♥ would be non-forcing, so to splinter would take you to 4♥. So you gain a level in both cases.

I think you need to read my post again.

1♠ - 2♦
3♦ = NF in Acol

[Gerben42]

Quote

1♠ - 2♦
3♦ = NF in Acol

Yikes! And what do you do with the more common hand type that wants to support ♦ and doesn't want partner to pass? Don't say I have to bid 4♦, hard to get to 3NT after 4♦...

[Blofeld]

I agree with that, Roland, but you said:

Roland said:

An additional point is that if you don't bid 3♦, you have lost the advantage of playing 2/1 GF where 2♦ was forcing to game.

And I was arguing with this, as the 2/1 GF also lets you splinter at a cheaper level, so you don't lose the advantage if you choose to splinter rather than bid 3♦.

[Walddk]

Gerben42, on Oct 10 2005, 02:53 PM, said:

Yikes! And what do you do with the more common hand type that wants to support ♦ and doesn't want partner to pass? Don't say I have to bid 4♦, hard to get to 3NT after 4♦...

I didn't invent Acol, Gerben, and this is one of the reasons why I don't play that system any more. Let me stick my neck out:

The Brits have some great players, but they have underachieved for years. A contributing factor is surely that they are sticking to methods that are too old for comfort.

Roland

[Walddk]

Blofeld, on Oct 10 2005, 02:57 PM, said:

I agree with that, Roland, but you said:

Roland said:

An additional point is that if you don't bid 3♦, you have lost the advantage of playing 2/1 GF where 2♦ was forcing to game.

And I was arguing with this, as the 2/1 GF also lets you splinter at a cheaper level, so you don't lose the advantage if you choose to splinter rather than bid 3♦.

I agree Blofeld, but I have 3♦ available when I play 2/1; I don't if I play Acol. And I think 3♦ is a better bid than 3♥ with the actual hand.

Roland

[P_Marlowe]

Gerben42, on Oct 10 2005, 07:53 AM, said:

Quote

1♠ - 2♦
3♦ = NF in Acol

Yikes! And what do you do with the more common hand type that wants to support ♦ and doesn't want partner to pass? Don't say I have to bid 4♦, hard to get to 3NT after 4♦...

Hi,

first of all show me the hand, you are talking
about, and I will tell you what to bid,

Even in traditional Acol 2H is forcing, this
is a fairly unknown aspect of the system,
nevertheless its true, ...

The reason: 2H could be fairly wide ranging,
because a bid on the 3 level, would still
show 19+HCP.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Walddk]

P_Marlowe, on Oct 10 2005, 03:54 PM, said:

Gerben42, on Oct 10 2005, 07:53 AM, said:

Quote

1♠ - 2♦
3♦ = NF in Acol

Yikes! And what do you do with the more common hand type that wants to support ♦ and doesn't want partner to pass? Don't say I have to bid 4♦, hard to get to 3NT after 4♦...

Hi,

first of all show me the hand, you are talking
about, and I will tell you what to bid,

Even in traditional Acol 2H is forcing, this
is a fairly unknown aspect of the system,
nevertheless its true, ...

The reason: 2H could be fairly wide ranging,
because a bid on the 3 level, would still
show 19+HCP.

With kind regards
Marlowe

OK then. What is your rebid in Acol with

AKJxx
xx
AKxx
xx

1♠ - 2♦
??

Must you jump to 4♦ and give up on 3NT? Or do you prefer to underbid with 3♦ and risk a pass when game is cold?

Roland

[mr1303]

If only the people in my university bridge club would read this and take it in. I've been advocating ditching Acol based methods for the last 4 years.....

[Walddk]

mr1303, on Oct 10 2005, 05:44 PM, said:

If only the people in my university bridge club would read this and take it in. I've been advocating ditching Acol based methods for the last 4 years.....

Maybe I can pursuade David Bird to let The Abbot and Brother Lucius switch to 5-card majors, but I doubt it. If the inhabitants of Great Britain and Northern Ireland really prefer to keep living in sin, I am not going to stop them

One step at a time, so perhaps start with 4½-card majors?

Roland

[P_Marlowe]

Walddk, on Oct 10 2005, 09:58 AM, said:

P_Marlowe, on Oct 10 2005, 03:54 PM, said:

Gerben42, on Oct 10 2005, 07:53 AM, said:

Quote

1♠ - 2♦
3♦ = NF in Acol

Yikes! And what do you do with the more common hand type that wants to support ♦ and doesn't want partner to pass? Don't say I have to bid 4♦, hard to get to 3NT after 4♦...

Hi,

first of all show me the hand, you are talking
about, and I will tell you what to bid,

Even in traditional Acol 2H is forcing, this
is a fairly unknown aspect of the system,
nevertheless its true, ...

The reason: 2H could be fairly wide ranging,
because a bid on the 3 level, would still
show 19+HCP.

With kind regards
Marlowe

OK then. What is your rebid in Acol with

AKJxx
xx
AKxx
xx

1♠ - 2♦
??

Must you jump to 4♦ and give up on 3NT? Or do you prefer to underbid with 3♦ and risk a pass when game is cold?

Roland

Hi Roland,

If you do not want to bid 3D, another possible
solution would be 2NT, which shows 15-16HCP,
and forces to partnership to game.

It is not perfect, but on the other hand, it would
be the book bid, with

AKJxx
xxx
AKx
xx

and there is not much difference between this hand
and the hand you gave.

And if you belong tro the school, wo opens

AKJx
xxx
AKxx
xx

with 1S, you 2NT did not even deny 4 card support for
diamond.

With kind regards
Marlowe

PS: Acol does not really shine, when it comes to slam
bidding, but that is the price you pay, to get in more
easily as opener / as reponder with option of getting out
easily.