BBO Discussion Forums: beep beep - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

beep beep

#21 User is offline   gnasher 

  • Andy Bowles
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 11,993
  • Joined: 2007-May-03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 2010-February-11, 17:01

PhantomSac, on Feb 11 2010, 10:39 PM, said:

In this auction especially we already have no way to invite in diamonds (3D is constructive but not really invite obv), and we can just bid 3H then diamonds with diamonds, so whatever. Sometimes they bid 4H on your left and you'd rather have bid 4D forcing rather than 3H, but I think having a way to invite is more important than that.

Is 3♦ even constructive? I wouldn't want to let them play 2♥ even if I had as little as K10xxx xx QJxx xx.

As usual, it makes sense to use 2NT to take up some of the slack. You could use 2NT as invitational+ with diamonds, but transfers work even better: 2NT = clubs, 3♣ = diamonds weak/strong, 3♦ = diamonds invitational.

Also as usual, as soon as I try to get from thinking "we should play transfers here" to working out which sequences it should apply to and how they vary, the idea becomes a complete nightmare.
... that would still not be conclusive proof, before someone wants to explain that to me as well as if I was a 5 year-old. - gwnn
0

#22 User is offline   Codo 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,373
  • Joined: 2003-March-15
  • Location:Hamburg, Germany
  • Interests:games and sports, esp. bridge,chess and (beach-)volleyball

Posted 2010-February-12, 01:18

2 NT inv +
W/O this tool I try a mere 3 ♦.
Kind Regards

Roland

Sanity Check: Failure (Fluffy)
More system is not the answer...
0
  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users