[P_Marlowe]

vang, on Oct 4 2007, 01:11 AM, said:

vuroth, on Oct 3 2007, 09:51 PM, said:

As someone who is trying to play as few gadgets as possible, NMF is not in SAYC.

i'm not sure if there is a definitive reference for SAYC, but cf http://www.amazon.com/Standard-Bidding-Say...y/dp/1897106033
NMF IS in SAYC.

Hi,

there is.
http://web2.acbl.org/documentlibrary/play/...gle%20pages.pdf

And much to my surprise, you find on page 4, that 2C / 2 D
bids in the sequence

1H - 1S
1NT - 2C / 2D

are non forcing, hence NMF is not part of SAYC.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[P_Marlowe]

Quantumcat, on Oct 4 2007, 01:01 AM, said:

But I don't understand. Doesn't 2♠ show four cards? Or is it okay to lie, because partner's not going to be involved much in the decision making except for answering your questions.

First of all, missing a suitable bid, you have to lie,
but a better wording is, you have to "improvise".

Second, 2S shows in theory a 4 card suit, but
mainly it shows a 5 card heart suit and spade
values.
Depending on your style, the 1NT bid already
denied a 4 card spade suit.
So South should have bid 3NT over 3S or 5D,
although a 5D bid is dangerous as well.

Third, NMF or what ever response structure you
are playing, tries to solve those problems.

But the main problem with the auction and the 2S
bid in particular is, that South tried to go sientific,
knowing, that there were no partnership agreement.
Instead of bidding 2S he should either bid 3NT or if he
wanted to look for slam 4C (a splinter) or 4D.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[FrancesHinden]

mike777, on Oct 3 2007, 08:35 PM, said:

jillybean2, on Oct 3 2007, 09:37 AM, said:

matmat, on Oct 3 2007, 06:52 AM, said:

don't you play some sort of new minor forcing?

this is with a pick up partner, no agreements

I would think if you are playing with a pickup partner, int or higher self rated then even with zero discussion(common) a bid of a new minor must be one round forcing at a minimum. one x...one y......1nt........2new minor.

IF partner did not mean it that way, you can always discuss it after the deal.

No. Geography hits again. If you are playing with an English partner, then with zero discussion:

1C - 1H - 1NT - 2D shows a weak hand with diamonds and hearts.

1D - 1H - 1NT - 2C is either 'checkback' (equivalent of NMF) or a weak hand with clubs and hearts... I'd hate to have to guess which.

[matmat]

P_Marlowe, on Oct 4 2007, 01:36 AM, said:

1H - 1S
1NT - 2C / 2D

are non forcing, hence NMF is not part of SAYC.

how about

1c - 1M
1N - 2d

or

1d - 1M
1n - 2c

there is a subtle difference between these auctions and the one where both majors are bid.

[mike777]

FrancesHinden, on Oct 4 2007, 03:07 AM, said:

mike777, on Oct 3 2007, 08:35 PM, said:

jillybean2, on Oct 3 2007, 09:37 AM, said:

matmat, on Oct 3 2007, 06:52 AM, said:

don't you play some sort of new minor forcing?

this is with a pick up partner, no agreements

I would think if you are playing with a pickup partner, int or higher self rated then even with zero discussion(common) a bid of a new minor must be one round forcing at a minimum. one x...one y......1nt........2new minor.

IF partner did not mean it that way, you can always discuss it after the deal.

No. Geography hits again. If you are playing with an English partner, then with zero discussion:

1C - 1H - 1NT - 2D shows a weak hand with diamonds and hearts.

1D - 1H - 1NT - 2C is either 'checkback' (equivalent of NMF) or a weak hand with clubs and hearts... I'd hate to have to guess which.

no?


I thought I said...you can discuss after deal if new minor 2 level was not forcing??????


We assume zero discussion.

[mike777]

FrancesHinden, on Oct 4 2007, 03:07 AM, said:

mike777, on Oct 3 2007, 08:35 PM, said:

jillybean2, on Oct 3 2007, 09:37 AM, said:

matmat, on Oct 3 2007, 06:52 AM, said:

don't you play some sort of new minor forcing?

this is with a pick up partner, no agreements

I would think if you are playing with a pickup partner, int or higher self rated then even with zero discussion(common) a bid of a new minor must be one round forcing at a minimum. one x...one y......1nt........2new minor.

IF partner did not mean it that way, you can always discuss it after the deal.

No. Geography hits again. If you are playing with an English partner, then with zero discussion:

1C - 1H - 1NT - 2D shows a weak hand with diamonds and hearts.

1D - 1H - 1NT - 2C is either 'checkback' (equivalent of NMF) or a weak hand with clubs and hearts... I'd hate to have to guess which.

I will rephrase:
1) I am playing with franceshinden....on bbo
2) zero system discussion
3) she bids new minor at 2 level
4) I choose 100% to never pass..I bid something...
5) if incorrect she will tell me at end of deal
6)

[helene_t]

FrancesHinden, on Oct 4 2007, 10:07 AM, said:

No. Geography hits again. If you are playing with an English partner, then with zero discussion:

1C - 1H - 1NT - 2D shows a weak hand with diamonds and hearts.

1D - 1H - 1NT - 2C is either 'checkback' (equivalent of NMF) or a weak hand with clubs and hearts... I'd hate to have to guess which.

Sounds pretty universal to me. But glad to hear, I will feel at home in England. I will be playing a lot of 2♣ contracts in 0-3 fits with combined 34 points, like I always did.

[gwnn]

I'm sure you have made at least half of those contract Helene.

[jdeegan]

This is an unusual auction. Partner bypassed spades in order to bid 1NT, then showed four spades. He/she must be 4-2-4-3 or 4-3-4-2 with a hand that suggests notrump. Give up on the diamond slam. 4♦ is forcing, but it is not the right bid. As several commentators pointed out, it sounds like a cue bid in support of spades. Follow partner's lead and bid 3NT.

[helene_t]

gwnn, on Oct 4 2007, 11:08 AM, said:

I'm sure you have made at least half of those contract Helene.

Lol, once p passed me in a CBS 3♣. 3♣ making in the 3-2 fit, while at the other table it was 6N down one. It was Board-A-Match