not a bad hand, buuut
#21
Posted 2010-March-29, 22:50
#22
Posted 2010-March-29, 22:50
MarkDean, on Mar 29 2010, 11:25 PM, said:
a stiff!? where are all the ♠?
bed
#23
Posted 2010-March-30, 05:46
#24
Posted 2010-March-30, 06:37
matmat, on Mar 29 2010, 03:18 AM, said:
[P] - P - [2♠] - ?
do you come in here? if so, how?
say you do not:
[P] - P - [2♠] - P
[P] - X -- [P] -- ?
now what?
- Immediately over RHO's 2♠, _X = 10, _P = 6, 3♥ = 5.
- When partner protects with _X, then 4♥ = 10, 3♥ = 5.
#25
Posted 2010-March-30, 08:05
#26
Posted 2010-March-30, 08:37
bed
#27
Posted 2010-March-30, 11:10
jjbrr, on Mar 30 2010, 08:37 AM, said:
Partner will have the decision, if 3H described this hand fairly well.
#28
Posted 2010-March-30, 11:42
hanp, on Mar 30 2010, 02:05 PM, said:
???
don't you mean we can still bid 2NT followed by 3H with a really bad hand with hearts, therefore 3H shows a little something? or are you going to bid 4♥ over 3♦ from partner?
George Carlin
#29
Posted 2010-March-31, 10:24
hanp, on Mar 30 2010, 09:05 AM, said:
This came up a few weeks ago and I heard three interpretations for 2N in response to a balancing x: Scrambling, Lebensohl ( but a higher range for 3x) and even natural were answers.
I agree that scrambling is the best application.
Winner - BBO Challenge bracket #6 - February, 2017.

Help
