[bid_em_up]

Huh?

Was it not yourself said in post #3?

whereagles, on Feb 14 2007, 02:19 PM, said:

I'm bidding 2♣ + 3♣. Pard prolly has the 15-17 hand and might get happy if I bid a straight 3♣. I'm not afraid them bidding 3♠ because that will probably go down.

Now you say that bidding over a weak 3♣ with the 15-17 clearly borders on overexuberancy?

whereagles, on Feb 15 2007, 09:03 AM, said:

mikeh, on Feb 15 2007, 03:49 AM, said:

Your point is??? You post an prime, control laden 18 point hand in reply to a comment about 15-17 point hands????

Hum.. well, since bidding over a weak 3♣ with the bal 15-17 clearly borders on over-exuberancy, I thought cherdano was mentioning the 18-19 hand

Mikes point is....bidding 2C then 3C will ENCOURAGE when he holds the 15-17 hand, not discourage. The 15-17 hand should pass an immediate preemptive raise of 3C. If the 15-17 hand gets happy/overexuberant, it is their problem. Your objective should be to make the correct bid on YOUR hand. If partner gets carried away, thats their problem. If its a regular partnership, you explain why they need to pass. If its a random player, you move on knowing you made the correct bid.

The given hand is either a pass or 3C. Nothing else even comes close.

[whereagles]

bid_em_up, on Feb 15 2007, 02:59 PM, said:

1. Now you say that bidding over a weak 3♣ with the 15-17 clearly borders on overexuberancy?

2. Mikes point is....bidding 2C then 3C will ENCOURAGE when he holds the 15-17 hand, not discourage.

3. Your objective should be to make the correct bid on YOUR hand. If partner gets carried away, thats their problem. If its a regular partnership, you explain why they need to pass. If its a random player, you move on knowing you made the correct bid.

The given hand is either a pass or 3C. Nothing else even comes close.

1. Well, the fact that pard should pass with 15-17 doesn't mean he WILL pass. I should take that into consideration.

2. But that's because we have different views about what 2C + 3C should mean.

3. Sorry, but I must disagree here. The objective of bidding ISN'T to make correct bids, but to reach a good contract. If I know my pard is trigger-happy, I must be more conservative. To talk about technically correct bids is all fine and dandy but we all know we must also take pard's style into consideration when picking a bid.

In short, if I think 3♣ might induce pard into (incorrectly) bidding 3NT, then I should perhaps try 2♣ only. That's my point.

[bid_em_up]

whereagles, on Feb 15 2007, 10:12 AM, said:

3. Sorry, but I must disagree here. The objective of bidding ISN'T to make correct bids, but to reach a good contract. If I know my pard is trigger-happy, I must be more conservative. To talk about technically correct bids is all fine and dandy but we all know we must also take pard's style into consideration when picking a bid.

In short, if I think 3♣ might induce pard into (incorrectly) bidding 3NT, then I should perhaps try 2♣ only. That's my point.

Disagree all you wish, but.....

How can you expect to reach good contracts if you don't make correct bids?

Bidding 2C and then 3C is MORE likely to induce partner into now correctly bidding 3N. And thats my point.

[pclayton]

bid_em_up, on Feb 15 2007, 08:01 AM, said:

whereagles, on Feb 15 2007, 10:12 AM, said:

3. Sorry, but I must disagree here. The objective of bidding ISN'T to make correct bids, but to reach a good contract. If I know my pard is trigger-happy, I must be more conservative. To talk about technically correct bids is all fine and dandy but we all know we must also take pard's style into consideration when picking a bid.

In short, if I think 3♣ might induce pard into (incorrectly) bidding 3NT, then I should perhaps try 2♣ only. That's my point.

Disagree all you wish, but.....

How can you expect to reach good contracts if you don't make correct bids?

Bidding 2C and then 3C is MORE likely to induce partner into now correctly bidding 3N. And thats my point.

Bid-em - what auction are you referring to?

Why would pard try 3N after you've balanced with 3♣?

(I think) Whereagles is referring to:

p - p - p - 1♣
1♠ - 2♣ - 2♠ - p
p - 3♣ - p ?

Inconceviable that pard would re-evaluate and try 3N now....

(As a side note, we play a double by the opener in a sequence like:

p - p - p - 1♣
1♠ - 2♣ - 2♠ - double

as cooperative, showing the balanced 15-17)

[whereagles]

bid_em_up, on Feb 15 2007, 04:01 PM, said:

How can you expect to reach good contracts if you don't make correct bids?

Because the right bid isn't always the correct one

[whereagles]

pclayton, on Feb 15 2007, 05:23 PM, said:

(I think) Whereagles is referring to:

p - p - p - 1♣
1♠ - 2♣ - 2♠ - p
p - 3♣ - p ?

Inconceviable that pard would re-evaluate and try 3N now....

Yes, that's what I meant. However, other posters think otherwise. That's just it.

[SoTired]

So your partner sees your timid bidding and bids even more aggressively to compensate. Then you have to bid even more timidly... and the cycle never ends.... Each bid being more and more wrong until neither partner knows what the other's bids actually mean.

One expert suggested that if they have an over-aggressive partner, that they bid aggressively, too. Even if they have to bid 8. Eventually, the partner will come down from the rafters and bid normally.

[whereagles]

SoTired, on Feb 15 2007, 05:31 PM, said:

1. So your partner sees your timid bidding and bids even more aggressively to compensate. Then you have to bid even more timidly... and the cycle never ends.... Each bid being more and more wrong until neither partner knows what the other's bids actually mean.

2. One expert suggested that if they have an over-aggressive partner, that they bid aggressively, too. Even if they have to bid 8. Eventually, the partner will come down from the rafters and bid normally.

1. On the contrary. If you bid soundly opposite an aggressive pard, he'll know you always have your bid and won't feel the need to compensate for your would-be underbids.

2. That's reckless. How can you expect pard to calm down if you don't do the same? Nonsense.

[inquiry]

I will add a punch here for a method I have been experimenting with here...

A 2NT jump bid over 1♠ shows either a very weak preemptive raise (the 0 to bad 5 type thing) of clubs or a game force club raise. 3♣ would be preemptive but promise some values. Of course, you have the same "you gave them a chance to cue-bid 3♣ on the way to 3♠ problem with this bidding method.

On the plus side, when you bid 3♣ directly, partner can often bid 3NT when it makes knowing you have a little something.

[pclayton]

inquiry, on Feb 15 2007, 02:56 PM, said:

I will add a punch here for a method I have been experimenting with here...

A 2NT jump bid over 1♠ shows either a very weak preemptive raise (the 0 to bad 5 type thing) of clubs or a game force club raise. 3♣ would be preemptive but promise some values. Of course, you have the same "you gave them a chance to cue-bid 3♣ on the way to 3♠ problem with this bidding method.

On the plus side, when you bid 3♣ directly, partner can often bid 3NT when it makes knowing you have a little something.

Well, you are a passed hand, so you can't have a GF.

What's a cue bid in this structure?

[inquiry]

pclayton, on Feb 15 2007, 06:03 PM, said:

inquiry, on Feb 15 2007, 02:56 PM, said:

I will add a punch here for a method I have been experimenting with here...

A 2NT jump bid over 1♠ shows either a very weak preemptive raise (the 0 to bad 5 type thing) of clubs or a game force club raise. 3♣ would be preemptive but promise some values. Of course, you have the same "you gave them a chance to cue-bid 3♣ on the way to 3♠ problem with this bidding method.

On the plus side, when you bid 3♣ directly, partner can often bid 3NT when it makes knowing you have a little something.

Well, you are a passed hand, so you can't have a GF.

What's a cue bid in this structure?

Invitiational raise, but can be game force raise where you don't want to bid 2NT for posititional reasons (if you want your partner to be the declearer if 3NT becomes the final contract). This later point is very importnat... only bid 2NT with a game forcing raise if you are comfortable declaring 3NT from your side.

Thus, after opener tries to sign off after the cue-bid, a new suit by responder lets opener know about the lack of a spade stopper.