[Quantumcat]

Bidding again once you've pre-empted, assuming you're not a complete beginner, is like saying "stuff you partner, your judgement's awful, I bet I know what you've got and that you should have bid 5♥. Since you aren't capable of bidding your own hand, I guess I'm going to have to do it for you". Which is fine for a professional playing with a 99 year old altzheimer's patient who is being paid to look after them, but not for a partnership of two actual players. The partner should take it as a grave insult.

[Cascade]

Quantumcat, on Aug 26 2009, 10:59 AM, said:

Bidding again once you've pre-empted, assuming you're not a complete beginner, is like saying "stuff you partner, your judgement's awful, I bet I know what you've got and that you should have bid 5♥. Since you aren't capable of bidding your own hand, I guess I'm going to have to do it for you". Which is fine for a professional playing with a 99 year old altzheimer's patient who is being paid to look after them, but not for a partnership of two actual players. The partner should take it as a grave insult.

Again while this is standard advice and it may well be good or even great advice to players that are new to the game I don't think it can be applied blindly to every hand.

This is especially so if your weak twos are wide-ranging in terms of high-card strength and side distribution.

[cherdanno]

Quantumcat, on Aug 25 2009, 05:59 PM, said:

Bidding again once you've pre-empted, assuming you're not a complete beginner, is like saying "stuff you partner, your judgement's awful, I bet I know what you've got and that you should have bid 5♥. Since you aren't capable of bidding your own hand, I guess I'm going to have to do it for you". Which is fine for a professional playing with a 99 year old altzheimer's patient who is being paid to look after them, but not for a partnership of two actual players. The partner should take it as a grave insult.

This is the kind of comment that makes BBF so tiring to read. Yeah, this is your opinion. I don't even have anything against it. But to just repeat your opinion, completely ignoring the well-argued points against it (see Fluffy's post above), is a complete waste of a post.

[Phil]

Quantumcat, on Aug 25 2009, 05:59 PM, said:

Which is fine for a professional playing with a 99 year old altzheimer's patient who is being paid to look after them, but not for a partnership of two actual players.

Now, now. My clients aren't 99. The oldest is only 85 and she's sharp as a tack.

By the way, if you aren't playing a double here as, I really, really want to bid 5♥, there is a mild amount of latitude given to a preemptor to take another call.

This business about "if you are thinking about taking another cal, you should have bid 3♥" isn't ironclad. We are allowed to listen to the auction and see how it has affected our hand.