[whereagles]

I use "unilateral" in this sense: with 12 hcp and a superb diamond suit, I know we belong in game. To invite a game when I should be bidding one is a unilateral decision, because, in my opinion, the hints that this is the right thing to do aren't strong enough (others disagree, though).

[Blofeld]

Yes, and my claim is that, bridge judgement aside, you're misusing the word. Bidding game is unilateral -- it doesn't given partner a say. I think what you want to say is that 3♣ and 3♦ are not unilateral enough (which can be just as bad).

At the table I'm pretty sure I'd bid 2M, but I quite like the arguments for 3♣.

[whereagles]

Ok, so what term would you use instead of 'unilateral'?

[FrancesHinden]

cardsharp, on Oct 31 2007, 09:51 AM, said:

This was from a partnership bidding room and I bid 3♣, albeit concerned that my hand was pretty good. However, like others, partner could have a pretty poor hand opposite.

This time he held ♠Axx ♥AQx ♦x ♣AJxxxx and bid 3NT which looks a comfortable place to be, even though 5♣ is the better contract.

So just to point out what I think you have implied: as long as you make some sort of invitational bid, you will end in game on this hand as partner won't pass.

(In fact after 1C - 1D - 2C - 3C I would have thought you have a very good chance of ending in 5C)

[the hog]

What a good hand for Mafia, but of course no one likes that do they? Here a 2M bid would be artificial and a stopper ask, as you can't have a 4 card Major.

[helene_t]

whereagles, on Oct 31 2007, 12:38 PM, said:

Ok, so what term would you use instead of 'unilateral'?

What's wrong with "wrong"?

[whereagles]

helene_t, on Oct 31 2007, 11:00 AM, said:

whereagles, on Oct 31 2007, 12:38 PM, said:

Ok, so what term would you use instead of 'unilateral'?

What's wrong with "wrong"?

"Wrong" is wrong because unilateral action need not be wrong

[helene_t]

I'm not saying the unilateral and wrong are synonymous. I'm saying that what you seem to think about the 3♣ bid is that it's wrong, not that it's unilateral.

Maybe there is a slightly more specific adjective which means "not giving enough information to partner". Maybe "un-specifc" or "un-informative" would be appropriate. But a unilateral call would be pass, 3N or 5♣.

[whereagles]

I hardly ever think a bid is "wrong". 3m is, in my opinion, simply lesser odds to work. It doesn't mean it's wrong.

[skjaeran]

whereagles, on Oct 31 2007, 11:31 AM, said:

I use "unilateral" in this sense: with 12 hcp and a superb diamond suit, I know we belong in game. To invite a game when I should be bidding one is a unilateral decision, because, in my opinion, the hints that this is the right thing to do aren't strong enough (others disagree, though).

Unilateral would to me be taking the "final" decision when you haven't got enough information to do that. I.e. in a position where you know the best contract is 3NT or 4♥ and you bid 4♥ instead of making a bid that will help partner make a more informed decision. It't unilateral in the sense that there's no longer any way back.

3♣ here would therefor not be unilateral IMO, since partner still has a chance to get it right.