[foo]

Josh, I see some things are not likely to change between us. That's life.
Let the battle be rejoined ;-)

If you think a JS to 2S with 4 S's and 18+ count is "laughable" when your partner is a passed hand, then you've obviously never been passed when you don't want to be after
...-pa;1m-foo;1S-??
I have no problems with 2N either, but prefer to describe my hand more directly in constructive auctions. In this case, suppressing AKT8 doesn't feel nearly as good as suppressing xxxx, Hxxx, or even HHxx. Suppressing HHhx seems a bit much.

As for me, I rather be at the 3 level or in Game when I supposed to be rather than languishing at the 1 level. YMMV.

...and please do not claim I have a problem with making a 2m 2/1 on a 4cm in a 18 HCP hand when I specifically said otherwise.

Nor have I said that I think your POV re: 1H-2C is unreasonable. Just that it is far from a silver bullet. I happen to prefer the problems of my way to the problems of yours. Again, YMMV.

[jdonn]

jdonn, on May 19 2007, 11:57 AM, said:

2: Rebidding 2♠ is laughable. Post that in another poll on adv/exp forum, you will find 85% rebidding 2NT, 14% rebidding 1♠, and you rebidding 2♠.

Lol no way. At the time I'm writing this,

http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?sho...=0&#entry193563

2NT is getting 85.71%, 1♠ is getting 14.29%, and 2♠ is getting just Foo. This was one of my better predictions yet

[the hog]

foo, on May 19 2007, 11:08 PM, said:

Josh, I can empathize with your POV, but there are at least 2 problems with your "solution" from my POV

1= We've all been taught "Majors above all else, NT next, and minors last" since bridge babyhood.
While I have some sympathy for ignoring S's xxxx in an otherwise suitable hand (like a 4333), I have considerably less sympathy for ignoring them when they are AKT8.

2= Like Fred and some others here on BBO, I like my 2/1's to show real suits or significant extras. An 18 count is certainly significant extras, but you are not going to be holding that as Responder very often.

Nothing is perfect in Bridge, but in general I'd rather make as many bids at the one level as my hand allows.


SIDE NOTE: The =BIGGEST= problem with the bidding on this board is that the wrong hand opened!. With a 6 1/2 or 6 3/4 loser moderately soft (no A's, 5/11 of your HCP are Q+J's) 11 count w/o 2 defensive tricks, S does not have an opening bid by most POVs playing SA or 2/1.

Things are considerably easier if the bidding starts ..-pa;1C-1H;2S-3D!;3N-4C;...
Oh look. We know
1= that Opener has 18+ and Responder has 10-11 with slam interest.
2= that there is no 44 S fit nor 53 H fit.
3= that there is a 44 or 54 C fit.
In this case Opener will either sign off in 4N or show 2 keycards w/ the CQ if 4C is 1430 in C's by agreement here.

Either way we'll end up playing 4N this time and having a good chance of finding slam when it is right.

Figuring out what contortions the 18 HCP hand should go through as Responder is a minor issue compared to the fact that
THIS SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN THE ISSUE IN THE FIRST PLACE.

I agree wholeheartedly with this post. Unless you play 2C as an artificial GF, perhaps using some sort of relay structure, I think that 1S is a far superior bid for the reasons Foo mentions.

[jdonn]

The_Hog, on May 19 2007, 06:40 PM, said:

I agree wholeheartedly with this post. Unless you play 2C as an artificial GF, perhaps using some sort of relay structure,  I think that 1S is a far superior bid for the reasons Foo mentions.

What ARE those reasons? 1 is a slogan, and 2 doesn't apply since the hand in question does have significant extras (and misquoted, as Fred posted less than a month ago a hand where when 3334 with a 13 count he responded 2♣ to the opening bid). Meanwhile if you agree with Foo's alternative auction so wholeheartedly, you should stand up for yourself and go to the poll I put up a few hours ago to become the very first vote for 2♠.

[han]

I'm tempted to log in with a couple of fake names and vote for 2♠, just to annoy Josh.

[jdonn]

Hannie, on May 19 2007, 07:10 PM, said:

I'm tempted to log in with a couple of fake names and vote for 2♠, just to annoy Josh.

WHAT MAKES YOU THINK I CAN BE ANNOYED?!?!

[foo]

jdonn, on May 19 2007, 07:03 PM, said:

The_Hog, on May 19 2007, 06:40 PM, said:

I agree wholeheartedly with this post. Unless you play 2C as an artificial GF, perhaps using some sort of relay structure,  I think that 1S is a far superior bid for the reasons Foo mentions.

What ARE those reasons? 1 is a slogan, and 2 doesn't apply since the hand in question does have significant extras (and misquoted, as Fred posted less than a month ago a hand where when 3334 with a 13 count he responded 2♣ to the opening bid). Meanwhile if you agree with Foo's alternative auction so wholeheartedly, you should stand up for yourself and go to the poll I put up a few hours ago to become the very first vote for 2♠.

Whoa! there are 2 different issues being discussed here.

a= Whether the 18 count =as Responder= should start with 1S or 2C

b= Whether the 18 =as Opener= should JS 2S as their rebid.

"b" is an deep position I took based on a miscount of the hand. Even I've retracted it
(see other thread).

"a" OTOH is no where near as extreme and has plenty of people on either side of responding 1S vs 2C.

[the hog]

jdonn, on May 20 2007, 07:24 AM, said:

Hannie, on May 19 2007, 07:10 PM, said:

I'm tempted to log in with a couple of fake names and vote for 2♠, just to annoy Josh.

WHAT MAKES YOU THINK I CAN BE ANNOYED?!?!

Well you are a rude, objectionable, opinionated poop if you are not annoyed.

In my case I am old and grumpy, but what is your excuse?

Seriously, Foo is right in his last post. There are 2 issues involved. I have read the theories behind a 2C rather than a 1S response and, as I said before, unless playing some sort of art. structure, I don't buy them.

The reason I much prefer a 1S bid is that by bidding 2C followed by 2S I can show a 5(+) 4 shape conveniently. If we respond 2C and eventually find a S fit, partner will be none the wiser about my C length. This could be crucial if he is looking at a good hand and something like the Kx of C.

[jdonn]

The_Hog, on May 19 2007, 07:44 PM, said:

Well you are a rude, objectionable, opinionated poop if you are not annoyed.

In my case I am old and grumpy, but what is your excuse?

I haven't decided yet. Leaning toward blaming society, but on second thought I'm going to say it's Justin's fault somehow.

[han]

The_Hog, on May 19 2007, 07:44 PM, said:

Well you are a rude, objectionable, opinionated poop if you are not annoyed.

In my case I am old and grumpy, but what is your excuse?

That's not an excuse, maybe it's a cause. I think it is rather unfortunate that your posts always suggest that your opinions are the only right opinions. It makes you look like a poor bridge player while sometimes it seems that you are not.

[the hog]

Well at least I am not a sycophant who blindly agrees with comments because of by whom they are made and not because of their content.

[whereagles]

The_Hog, on May 21 2007, 11:15 PM, said:

Well at least I am not a sycophant who blindly agrees with comments because of by whom they are made and not because of their content.

Unfortunately, the effect of words depends more on who speaks them than on what they actually are