Help
Quote
As to your first observation -- obviously, I did not mean to BLAST 4♥, although in a pinch the contract is odds-on. You would obviously make game tries on route.
Quote
As to your second comment, I don't even know what you are talking about. First, in one example one auction occurs and in another a different auction occurs because they are meant to be different instances. Second, ability to bid intelligently obviously also means ability to pass intelligently, either of which is better than stumble-bunny guessing.
All i understand from this is that you haven't understood what i wanted to say. I tried to explain you that major suits in bridge auctions(especially competitive) are way more important than minor suits. It is really nice that you have found an easy call of 3♣ (after 1♥-[1♠] it would surely be slightly harder), but opponents have enough information to judge which way to go. They are likely to win auction just by bidding more ♠, and all your efforts are pretty useless. If not, then you would end up in 3♣ also after 1♥-[1♠] start. I am not arguing that you would score bad when this bid comes up (1%?!), it is actually quite impossible with so restricted bid. But rather that in nowadays there are many way more logical and lucrative methods.
Quote
As to your third comment, the 2M opening is not THAT rare. Any bid in bridge is "rare" in the sense that you might pass, you might open any of four suits at the one-level, you might open any number of suits at a higher level, and you might open any level of notrump. So, each one is "rare." But, a major-club two-suiter is not that rare.
Quote
As to your fourth example, WHAT?!?!? You don't need to bid 4♣ because partner has a really good idea of your hand, and 3♦ occurs less than 2♦ anyway. I don't even understand that comment, at all.
Yes 3♦ will occur slightly less than 2♦, but it is again general advantage for opening 2♥ rather than 1♥. But not advantage for playing 2♥ opening bid as 5♥4♣, e.g. i choose weak 2 in ♥ and use same argument. My argument is stronger in frequency reasons and also that my 2 ♥ bid is weaker, so more points around the table and more chance that opponents own hand and need to bid.
Quote
As to the final question -- no. I was not joking. My partners and I had tons of unexpected pluses for lucrative doubles, tons of slams bid or avoided for great results, tons of -50 or -100 against their games, tons of marginal games bid but +110 tops for passing correctly, and the like. So, yes. The merits of the call were established quite well.
Would be interesting for me to go through these ton of boards and also your w2's boards or whatever which boards you sacrificed to play these outstanding openings.