Help
Noting the reference to Rosencranz redoubles in the recent post
I am trying to find out as much as possible about defensive doubles and Rosencranz redoubles. So far:
http://www.firesides.net/kaleido3.htm
I like the Rosencrantz redouble idea, but have reservations about defensive doubles, especially the completely different bids by advancer at red.
Any further info or links on defensive doubles and I would be most grateful
Page 1 of 1
Defensive doubles and Rosencrantz redoubles Information or links please
#1
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 925
- Joined: 2004-September-13
- Gender:Male
- Location:England
- Interests:I have discovered that the water cooler is a chrono-synclastic infundibulum
Posted 2007-January-30, 11:15
May 2003: Mission accomplished
Oct 2006: Mission impossible
Soon: Mission illegal
Oct 2006: Mission impossible
Soon: Mission illegal
#2
- Brain Farts and Actual Farts Increasing with Age
-
- 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 2007-January-30, 11:40
The idea behind a Rosenkranz (Re)Double is a sound one -- it incorporates thinking about the defense into bidding. Similar concepts are lead-directing responses to preempts and Suit/Lead after a takeout/negative double.
The "error" in application of Rosenkranz occurs when the X(X) shows (or denies -- Reverse R.) an Ace or King but says nothing about strength. One solution is to use another "Rosenkranz" call to direct the lead as well. For instance, you might incorporate a 2NT call or a jump cue as a "preemptive Rosenkranz," to distinguish a straight preempt; or, perhaps a cue versus 2NT as invitational with lead implications. Whatever.
The "error" in application of Rosenkranz occurs when the X(X) shows (or denies -- Reverse R.) an Ace or King but says nothing about strength. One solution is to use another "Rosenkranz" call to direct the lead as well. For instance, you might incorporate a 2NT call or a jump cue as a "preemptive Rosenkranz," to distinguish a straight preempt; or, perhaps a cue versus 2NT as invitational with lead implications. Whatever.
"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.
-P.J. Painter.
#3
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 9,151
- Joined: 2003-June-11
- Location:Southern California
Posted 2007-January-30, 13:31
There's better uses than Rosencranz doubles / redoubles.
But they are one of those tools that you can check on a cc when you have only 15 minutes to fill one out. Usually, an agreement to play a marginal convention is better than no agreement at all.
But they are one of those tools that you can check on a cc when you have only 15 minutes to fill one out. Usually, an agreement to play a marginal convention is better than no agreement at all.
"Phil" on BBO
#4
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 3,153
- Joined: 2003-February-28
Posted 2007-January-30, 13:43
"But they are one of those tools that you can check on a cc when you have only 15 minutes to fill one out. Usually, an agreement to play a marginal convention is better than no agreement at all."
Assuming you remember the marginal convention you have agreed to play
Peter
Assuming you remember the marginal convention you have agreed to play
Peter
Page 1 of 1