[TylerE]

Pretty sure. I definatly remembered it because it's not a score I'd written down before.

[kenrexford]

jdonn, on Feb 6 2009, 10:08 AM, said:

kenrexford, on Feb 6 2009, 09:32 AM, said:

Just tossing out a thought here.  Has anyone ever run a series of sample deals to see what would happen if Responder immediately raised the major with Hx and a 10-count rather than some other move?  This situation seems to be a recurring problem.  It seems intuitive that handling this hand 1♥-P-2♥ has its obvious downsides, but then some of those could be "cured" or minimized with some technique, like 3NT remaining more in the picture than usually and side suits raised more often.

I just wonder if that option might actually work more than gut instinct or CW suggests.

The big problem I have with this, and have seen in practice as well as thought in theory, is that if the opponents compete partner goes to the 3 level much too often.

Ah, but it the LTTC applies, won't you offset occasional overbids by us when the opponents overbid competitively, expecting an 8-fit? Won't you also increase the fear factor for the opponents when the call is alerted as possibly a 2-card fit with bulk?

I mean, 1♠-P-2♠! "He might have Hx in spades and about a good 9 to bad 11." If the OPP bid 3♣, he might catch the latter and get hammered with no law protection. If he does not bid, he might miss a 19-trump layout.

So, although there are downsides and risks, there seem to be compensating upsides and benefits. I wonder about the relative weights of each.

Obviously, the approach of pros and cons means swingy action, which in and of itself may be a benefit to some but a detriment to others.

[jdonn]

Ken if your general argument is that our side misbidding might cause their side to misjudge, I agree. But that's always true. I don't consider it a very good reason to misbid in general.

[ArtK78]

This is beginning to sound like a Hideous Hog argument. I may not have the quote 100% accurate, but it goes something like this, "No bid is truly bad if it provokes the opponents into making a worse bid."

[mtvesuvius]

3♣, no need to mastermind this...

LOL @ Partner's pass.

[jtfanclub]

kenrexford, on Feb 6 2009, 10:46 AM, said:

I mean, 1♠-P-2♠! "He might have Hx in spades and about a good 9 to bad 11."

Had that discussion with my mentor before...after reading "To bid or Not to bid", I said that if everybody wasn't going to let us play after 1♥-P-2♥-P-P unless it was going to be a bad result, shouldn't we start including hands with 8-10 and Hx support as well as 6-9 and 3 card support?

He said, if we found that nobody was letting us play 2♥, he'd certainly consider it.

Of course, lots of people happily let us play in 2♥, so we never did add it. Why attempt to confuse the opponents if they were going to be good and let us bid without interference?

We did add those hands to 1♥ X 2♥. I forget if we're alone in that or not. (Precision, so the odds of game are remote).

[kenrexford]

jdonn, on Feb 6 2009, 10:59 AM, said:

Ken if your general argument is that our side misbidding might cause their side to misjudge, I agree. But that's always true. I don't consider it a very good reason to misbid in general.

Not exactly.

A raise on Hx support is not a "misbid" unless the call specifically excludes that possibility. If the bid can include that possibility, it is not a misbid. Rather, it is a bid that leaves the opponents without a piece of the puzzle necessary for their decisions to be as reliable.

The idea of raising with less than full knowledge of an 8-fit is far from unusual. If I recall correctly, I think 3-card raises were/are advocated in some situations when using 4-card major openings. Equally, we often raise Responder's 4+ suit with a 3-card fragment. Thus, this is not exactly branching out into crazy land.

Furthermore, because of the rampant use of Bergen raises, there is a sort of symmetry to this. Whereas 20 years ago a simple raise might have 3-4 cards of support, or even 5, the modern 1-2 raise much less frequently features a 4-fit and almost never a 5-fit. Hence, the utility of the call has in a sense decreased, which has fine-tuned bidding. Expanding it a tad in the other direction, with compensating HCPs, does not seem like a huge leap to explore.

[qwery_hi]

kenrexford, on Feb 7 2009, 08:16 AM, said:

jdonn, on Feb 6 2009, 10:59 AM, said:

Ken if your general argument is that our side misbidding might cause their side to misjudge, I agree. But that's always true. I don't consider it a very good reason to misbid in general.

Not exactly.

A raise on Hx support is not a "misbid" unless the call specifically excludes that possibility. If the bid can include that possibility, it is not a misbid. Rather, it is a bid that leaves the opponents without a piece of the puzzle necessary for their decisions to be as reliable.

The idea of raising with less than full knowledge of an 8-fit is far from unusual. If I recall correctly, I think 3-card raises were/are advocated in some situations when using 4-card major openings. Equally, we often raise Responder's 4+ suit with a 3-card fragment. Thus, this is not exactly branching out into crazy land.

Furthermore, because of the rampant use of Bergen raises, there is a sort of symmetry to this. Whereas 20 years ago a simple raise might have 3-4 cards of support, or even 5, the modern 1-2 raise much less frequently features a 4-fit and almost never a 5-fit. Hence, the utility of the call has in a sense decreased, which has fine-tuned bidding. Expanding it a tad in the other direction, with compensating HCPs, does not seem like a huge leap to explore.

I think this is worth exploring. I'd like to experiment with playing it and look at my results at MPs.