[Winstonm]

All you have stated is that you hold an opinion and that your opinion is the norm at this time. You and the rest of the world may right.

However, the norm at one time also was that the world was flat, the Earth was the center of the universe, and the world was created by a deity in 6 days.

Best be careful about absolute statements based on norms and wisdom of the day.

By the way, your statement should be interpreted as a Statement of Fact, and thus is not a claim but an implicit argument.

Quote

To state the facts well, we must realize that the Statement of Facts is an implicit argument. What is an implicit argument? Any argument, whether implicit or explicit, is an answer to the question "why".

Quote

The main advantage of the limited opening system

Holds that there is a benefit

Quote

is in competition.

answers "why?".

[jdonn]

Winstonm, on Jan 1 2009, 07:13 PM, said:

However, the norm at one time also was that the world was flat, the Earth was the center of the universe, and the world was created by a deity in 6 days.

Would it have been arrogant for a person of the day to say so?

Didn't think so.

[Winstonm]

jdonn, on Jan 1 2009, 07:22 PM, said:

Winstonm, on Jan 1 2009, 07:13 PM, said:

However, the norm at one time also was that the world was flat, the Earth was the center of the universe, and the world was created by a deity in 6 days.

Would it have been arrogant for a person of the day to say so?

Didn't think so.

Talking to yourself and answering your own questions is not my defintion of arrogance.

Quote

Arrogance: Marked by or arising from a feeling or assumption of one's superiority toward others

To answer your question, the definition of arrogant leads me to think that it would depend on the attitude or feelings projected whether or not it would be considered arrogant. Disdain for opposing points of view would also be a part of it.

[mikestar]

I pass here, too much danger of a misfit. I don't fancy the possibility of 3♦X. I play weak jump shifts over limited openings, so I would have chosen 3♦ initially rather than 1NT. I wouldn't have passed this hand back in the days when I required 8 HCP or the distributional equivalent to respond on a misfit.

[MFA]

The norwegian viking club doesn't operate with a normal 1NT response to 1♠, so one has to pass with a lot of weak hands.
In the version I play, there are transfers, so we could bid 2♣ planning to get out in 2♦. But reverse the minors, and we would have to pass 1♠. I have no problem with that. With this hand I think I would prefer a pass to a normal 1NT response.

[brianshark]

Playing a limited-opening system, I would definitely pass this. The main downside of passing is it going 1s p p p, so I do acknowledge that bidding 1N gives us a chance to improve the contract. However, I think there is significant chance of disproving the contract by getting too high as well. And to be honest, I don't buy the argument of bidding to rob the opponents out of a game or part-score. It looks to me like I want to give the opponents a chance to start bidding because it looks like a misfit deal and it would be better if we were defending something. If the opponents did bid their way to 3NT, I'd be very tempted to double.

But if the pros of today are bidding with these hands, there must be something I'm missing.