Help
awm, on Jul 21 2010, 11:15 PM, said:
junyi_zhu, on Jul 21 2010, 05:42 PM, said:
Even against weak players, it's unnecessary IMO. First, both have passed; Second, they may balance for a very small amount of time; Third, if they are really fans to balance, you can always trap with some pretty good hands once in a while to make big penalties against them at 3 level. Fourth, if they balance, they may play in the wrong suit and you may want to actually defend it. So bidding 3M only achieves when they balance and they can find their best fit which you don't want to defend, even at that time, you can still bid 3S if you don't want to defend.
Well, the tradeoffs are that:
By balancing opponents may find a good lead against 3♠ when they'd otherwise be guessing.
Opponents may find a way to compete to the four-level after their balance.
Opponents have an easier time doubling 3♠ after the balance pushes you there.
------> With all this said, I'm not a big fan of this style. Certainly it can sometimes help you to bid to the three-level when you're not forced there (for the reasons above), but I think opponents sell to two of a major just often enough (and 3M goes down just often enough) that I'm better off waiting to be pushed rather than bidding up to 3M on my own. While the point has been made that you have a lot of other ways to try for game in a major, the big advantage of 1M-2M-3M as a game try is that it doesn't disclose much information to the opponents on defense.
Well, those are minor concerns.
Lead directing value is never a big concern here, because the frequency of the balance is rather low. Penalty doubles are also not important when you hold a 9 card fit playing a partial. If they can find a playable spot at 4th level, they should probably act earlier. 1M 2M 3M as an invitation is indeed not bad IMO, because often, you don't want to bid a game very clearly.
