Your call?
#3
Posted 2009-August-26, 03:25
Some play, that 3D promises 3 card support for partners major, this
would of course be perfect.
I dont know, what they bid without 3 card support, most likely 2NT,
forcing with a 6 card suit.
Playing standard, just show your overall values and the 6th diamond
and you will be doing fine most of the time.
With kind regards
Marlowe
Uwe Gebhardt (P_Marlowe)
#4
Posted 2009-August-26, 04:10
#6
Posted 2009-August-26, 05:29
To open 1NT instead of 1D has appeal,
#7
Posted 2009-August-26, 07:23
the Freman, Chani from the move "Dune"
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it."
George Bernard Shaw
#8
Posted 2009-August-26, 08:15
--Always remember you're unique. Just like everyone else.
#9
Posted 2009-August-26, 09:32
Harald
#10
Posted 2009-August-26, 09:50
We are all connected to each other biologically, to the Earth chemically, and to the rest of the universe atomically.
We're in the universe, and the universe is in us.
#11
Posted 2009-August-26, 09:57
Whether or not you play 2♣ as forcing, or close to it, isn't that important.
If you consider the subset of hands that passes 3♦ and the subset that passes 2♣, they are quite similar. So why not try to get across the fact you have three spades, and nine cards in the minors?
Great problem.
Winner - BBO Challenge bracket #6 - February, 2017.
#12
Posted 2009-August-26, 10:42
Phil, on Aug 26 2009, 10:57 AM, said:
why not try to get across the fact you have three spades, and nine cards in the minors?
I don't understand this - 1D-1S;2C could be 0355 shape
#13
Posted 2009-August-26, 11:12
rd6789, on Aug 26 2009, 11:42 AM, said:
Phil, on Aug 26 2009, 10:57 AM, said:
why not try to get across the fact you have three spades, and nine cards in the minors?
I don't understand this - 1D-1S;2C could be 0355 shape
It could be 6-6 too. What is your point?
Winner - BBO Challenge bracket #6 - February, 2017.
#14
Posted 2009-August-26, 11:44
#15
Posted 2009-August-26, 11:47
rd6789, on Aug 26 2009, 12:44 PM, said:
No. My hope is to raise spades later (if given the chance).
Of course 2♣ doesn't show 3 card spade support, thats silly. I think newer players read posts about Gazzilli and Cole and it screws them up.
Winner - BBO Challenge bracket #6 - February, 2017.
#16
Posted 2009-August-26, 12:25
Not 3♦ even if my diamonds were better than this, as I do not want to emphasize playing in diamonds - I want to emphasize playing in spades, even on a 4-3. But I do not want to imply that I have 4 spades by raising directly to 3♠, which is what my hand is worth.
The idea of opening this hand 1NT cannot be taken seriously.
#18
Posted 2009-August-26, 12:46
I think 2C runs a real risk of partner passing because:
- partner is a passed hand;
- the diamonds are significantly longer than the clubs (so partner will likely hold longer clubs than diamonds);
- where are the hearts? Partner could easily hold 5-4 or 5-5 in the majors and pass out the "misfit". He might do this with a decent hand, which would be a disaster.
#19
Posted 2009-August-26, 13:17
#20
Posted 2009-August-26, 18:21
Phil, on Aug 26 2009, 10:57 PM, said:
Whether or not you play 2♣ as forcing, or close to it, isn't that important.
If you consider the subset of hands that passes 3♦ and the subset that passes 2♣, they are quite similar. So why not try to get across the fact you have three spades, and nine cards in the minors?
Great problem.
And 2C is not a distortion, Phil? Sorry , but this is a lol.
ps-ps-1♦-ps
1♠-ps-??