[Winstonm]

The obvious is the meaning also depends on the usage of an immediate 2N.

If 1H-2N can be used as natural, it pretty much eliminates the 3334 with bad trumps.

[foo]

So here is my complete "modest proposal" for handling all the hand types implied by this thread. I present this as a SUGGESTION in the hopes of advancing the State of the Art and evoking thoughtful discussion.

I do not claim this to be the best possible structure. It may very well be flawed. That's why I am bringing it up here. Nor am I claiming that any of this is "standard" in any way. Every expert I've talked to says
a= this is not a well defined area.
b= that this is deep enough in the auction and detailed enough that this discussion is only appropriate for mature partnerships.

Some assumptions
1M-2m;2foo-3m is GF
4SF is on in 2/1 auctions
These are slam interested Responding hands.

=3334
=2344
=2335
=3325
=2326 (Some. Judgment call.)
with xxx in ♥'s
1H-2C;2S-2N;3N-4H
with hxx or better in ♥'s
1H-2C;2S-3H;etc

=3235 or =2245
with xx or hx in ♥'s
...and D stoppers
1H-2C;2S-2N;3N-4N
...w/o D Stoppers
1H-2C;2S-3D!etc

with Hh in ♥'s
hhx_hh_xxx_hhxxx or hxx_hh_xxx_hhhxx or hx_hh_xxxx_hhxxx
1H-2C;2S-3D!etc
xxx_hh_xxx_hhhxx (may not be good enough) or xx_hh_xxxx_hhhxx
1H-2C;2S-2N;3N-4C!
xxx_hh_hhx_hhxxx or xx_hh_hxxx_hhxxx
1H-2C;2S-2N;3N-4D!
hxx_hh_hxx_hhxxx or hxx_hh_hhx_hxxxx or hhx_hh_hxx_hxxxx or
hx_hh_hxxx_hxxxx or ... All Suits are Stopped.
1H-2C;2S-2N;3N-4S!

The above list of hand types is supposed to be complete enough to make the point as to what hand types are involved for each sequence. It is not intended to be exhaustive.

I ?think? this handles all the hand types at a safe auction level while allowing the partnership to find out what it needs to know in all cases.

What do people think?

[bobbywjch]

foo, on Mar 15 2008, 10:03 AM, said:

So here is my complete "modest proposal" for handling all the hand types implied by this thread. I present this as a SUGGESTION in the hopes of advancing the State of the Art and evoking thoughtful discussion.

I do not claim this to be the best possible structure. It may very well be flawed. That's why I am bringing it up here. Nor am I claiming that any of this is "standard" in any way. Every expert I've talked to says
a= this is not a well defined area.
b= that this is deep enough in the auction and detailed enough that this discussion is only appropriate for mature partnerships.

Some assumptions
1M-2m;2foo-3m is GF
4SF is on in 2/1 auctions
These are slam interested Responding hands.

=3334
=2344
=2335
=3325
=2326 (Some. Judgment call.)
with xxx in ♥'s
1H-2C;2S-2N;3N-4H
with hxx or better in ♥'s
1H-2C;2S-3H;etc

=3235 or =2245
with xx or hx in ♥'s
...and D stoppers
1H-2C;2S-2N;3N-4N
...w/o D Stoppers
1H-2C;2S-3D!etc

with Hh in ♥'s
hhx_hh_xxx_hhxxx or hxx_hh_xxx_hhhxx or hx_hh_xxxx_hhxxx
1H-2C;2S-3D!etc
xxx_hh_xxx_hhhxx (may not be good enough) or xx_hh_xxxx_hhhxx
1H-2C;2S-2N;3N-4C!
xxx_hh_hhx_hhxxx or xx_hh_hxxx_hhxxx
1H-2C;2S-2N;3N-4D!
hxx_hh_hxx_hhxxx or hxx_hh_hhx_hxxxx or hhx_hh_hxx_hxxxx or
hx_hh_hxxx_hxxxx or ... All Suits are Stopped.
1H-2C;2S-2N;3N-4S!

The above list of hand types is supposed to be complete enough to make the point as to what hand types are involved for each sequence. It is not intended to be exhaustive.

I ?think? this handles all the hand types at a safe auction level while allowing the partnership to find out what it needs to know in all cases.

What do people think?

must be a comp geek

[foo]

?? "must be a comp geek" ??

I was not aware I was using "comp geek" jargon?

The goal was to tightly define the hand types and sequences involved. I used language that was as clear and concise as I could. If it was not understandable, or if someone has a better way to communicate the information, I'm "all ears"?

The kind of detail I'm showing here is often seen in the System notes of expert partnerships.

[han]

comp = complete?

[foo]

han, on Mar 16 2008, 12:54 AM, said:

comp = complete?

*shrug* He'll explain if he wants to.

Back on topic, What do you think of my proposal Han?

[han]

Sorry, I didn't read it yet.

[jdonn]

LOL "yet"

[Apollo81]

han, on Mar 14 2008, 12:45 PM, said:

Agree with the Q10x KJ xxx AKJxx construction.

I would not bid 2NT on any hand with ♦xxx