Hi all,
an italian expert (RIOLO937 on BBO) is writing an article to be published in Italy on some differences between SAYC (+conventions), 2/1 and some advanced version of italian 5-card major.
He has asked me to inquire about the following problem:
say you hold and open 1H and p responds 1 spades
x-AKQxx -AKxx-xxx
1H:1S
?
3D would be game force showing more than 16 HCP, and you do not want to force game opposite a minimum.
2D would be non-forcing. If pard has an average 7-8 count in misfit he will pass.
Yet, it is easy to construct many 16-17 hcp hands that will be laydown 3NT even in misfit, but that do not justify a 3-level game force.
SO, HERE IS THE QUESTION:
IS THERE ANY CONVENTIONAL TREATMENT THAT ALLOWS TO DISCRIMINATE GAME FORCE REVERSE FROM MINIMUM REVERSES IN THIS CASE (e.g. 2NT Ingberman is not available) ?
Thanks all
Page 1 of 1
Conv. for reverses not worth GF 3-level jumpshift?
#1
Posted 2004-January-16, 09:08
"Bridge is like dance: technique's important but what really matters is not to step on partner's feet !"
#2
Posted 2004-January-17, 20:18
Chamaco, on Jan 16 2004, 10:08 AM, said:
Hi all,
an italian expert (RIOLO937 on BBO) is writing an article to be published in Italy on some differences between SAYC (+conventions), 2/1 and some advanced version of italian 5-card major.
He has asked me to inquire about the following problem:
say you hold and open 1H and p responds 1 spades
x-AKQxx -AKxx-xxx
1H:1S
?
3D would be game force showing more than 16 HCP, and you do not want to force game opposite a minimum.
2D would be non-forcing. If pard has an average 7-8 count in misfit he will pass.
Yet, it is easy to construct many 16-17 hcp hands that will be laydown 3NT even in misfit, but that do not justify a 3-level game force.
SO, HERE IS THE QUESTION:
IS THERE ANY CONVENTIONAL TREATMENT THAT ALLOWS TO DISCRIMINATE GAME FORCE REVERSE FROM MINIMUM REVERSES IN THIS CASE (e.g. 2NT Ingberman is not available) ?
Thanks all
an italian expert (RIOLO937 on BBO) is writing an article to be published in Italy on some differences between SAYC (+conventions), 2/1 and some advanced version of italian 5-card major.
He has asked me to inquire about the following problem:
say you hold and open 1H and p responds 1 spades
x-AKQxx -AKxx-xxx
1H:1S
?
3D would be game force showing more than 16 HCP, and you do not want to force game opposite a minimum.
2D would be non-forcing. If pard has an average 7-8 count in misfit he will pass.
Yet, it is easy to construct many 16-17 hcp hands that will be laydown 3NT even in misfit, but that do not justify a 3-level game force.
SO, HERE IS THE QUESTION:
IS THERE ANY CONVENTIONAL TREATMENT THAT ALLOWS TO DISCRIMINATE GAME FORCE REVERSE FROM MINIMUM REVERSES IN THIS CASE (e.g. 2NT Ingberman is not available) ?
Thanks all
I am not familiar with any conventions that handle a problem like that. But playing 2/1 pd has to know that with bidding 2
pd still can have up to unbalanced 17 count. About any relay will get you to 3 level anyhow, or you ar taking away natural bids. If you have a fit, just raise. Without fit and other 2 suits bid NT if you have about 9 count. Sometimes you just have to rely on bridge instinct, cause you can't have a convention for everything Mike
“If there is dissatisfaction with the status quo, good. If there is ferment,
so much the better. If there is restlessness, I am pleased. Then let there
be ideas, and hard thought, and hard work.”
so much the better. If there is restlessness, I am pleased. Then let there
be ideas, and hard thought, and hard work.”
Page 1 of 1

Help
