kenrexford, on Apr 7 2007, 04:36 PM, said:
jdonn,
I'm not sure why you are mis-describing what I have proposed and then knocking down that misdescription with an argument that does cover what I actually wrote.
You will notice that I never stated "problem solved!" Rather, I noted that I was comfortable with the unfortunate realities created by the 2♥ double negative. Being comfortable strongly implies, or was meant to imply, and could be contextually understyood to mean, that the evils for me are less problematic than the benefits.
I'm not sure why you are mis-describing what I have proposed and then knocking down that misdescription with an argument that does cover what I actually wrote.
You will notice that I never stated "problem solved!" Rather, I noted that I was comfortable with the unfortunate realities created by the 2♥ double negative. Being comfortable strongly implies, or was meant to imply, and could be contextually understyood to mean, that the evils for me are less problematic than the benefits.
That statement was obviously paraphrasing (not quoting - important distinction) regarding your idea of making the 1♥ opening bid heavier and that it seemed you were ignorring the potential avalanche of changes in system this would lead to. You called this idea "the solution". Don't hide from your own posts.
"To me, the solution for the problem that jdonn notes is this potentially bulky 1♥ opening." Sorry, I didn't realize that you having found the "solution for the problem" didn't mean the problem was solved. My bad.
Quote
What I noted was that there is something between 2♣-P-2♥-P-P-P and 2♣-P-2♥-P-3♥ that must be opened 1♥. I also gave the most common specific case, namely the 5-5 player with hearts an a minor. With strong enough values, and two-suited,m you could bid 2♣...3♥...4minor. With a minimum 2♣ opening, you could probably pass 2♥ with six hearts. However, with insufficient values to force game opposite a 2♥ response, but too strong to pass 2♥, you would open 1♥.
I barely even know where to start. First of all what is this talk about passing 2♥ when you know nothing about partner's shape? Do you enjoy playing your 11 card fit at the 2 level? Or what if partner is 7132 opposite your 36 in the majors? And what is this nonexistant range of hands that are better than a minimum 2♣ opener but not good enough to chance forcing to game opposite a bust? Minimum 2♣ openers with a suit are within a trick of game, there is no inbetween.
Quote
This does not mean that every hand must be bid after a 1♥ opening, as you suggest. Rather, the "big hand problem" is one where passing is a bad idea when Responder has a fit. Thus, Responder will tend to raise 1♥ with lesser values than usually are expected. If you play a constructive raise approach, as I do, then these weak raises are handled via a forcing 1NT. So, whereas you might otherwise pass 1♥ with something like xxx-Qxx-Jx-xxxxx, you might now feel obligated to bid a forcing 1NT and then bid 2♥, showing a bust raise. You would not feel obligated to make a call that yields a 17-count opposite a 2-count "without even a fit" because that would be stupid.
1) You said a common hand that opens 1♥ even though it's good enough for 2♣ is 5-5 in hearts and a minor. So this fit you speak of CAN BE IN THE MINOR TOO. How can partner risk passing your 1♥ opening with a 2155 yarbrough when you can be 5-5 in hearts and a minor with some 24 count? Responder has two choices if you are opening 1♥ this way. You can pass the 1♥ opening on very light hands that can easily have games and slams, or you can bid with nothing and make all later parts of these auctions unbearable for both players (see my last post).
2) Responding 1NT then bidding 2♥ doesn't "show" a bust raise, though you may play it can be one. Have you ever been 3253 with a nine count and had partner rebid 2♣? How does partner know you have virtually nothing when he is worth a third bid if you only had full values?
Quote
Remember that the bulky 1♥ hand is one that is unbiddable, and Responder will be aggressive when he can cater well to that. In other words, Responder will not pass a 1♥ opening if he would have liked an auction that started 2♣-P-2♥-P-2♥, insufficient bid accepted.
Will he pass with Kxxx x xxxx xxxx? Hope you don't have Ax AKJxx AKJxx x (or if you don't think that is good enough for 2♣ sans your ideas about the 1♥ opening, start adding queens until it is).

Help
