Help
Our own KenRexford wrote a piece in HIS Cuebidding Blogspot ( http://cuebiddingatb....blogspot.com/. )
entitled: Impossible 2S Not So Impossible . Oct 15, 2010 .
It wasn't very long, so here it is:
" In the ACBL Bulletin, a problem hand was given. Something like xxxx-x-xx-AKJxxx after a 1H opening from partner. A large number of expert votes came in for a forcing 1NT, because focusing clubs even at the cost of burying spades seemed right.
If we assume this to be reasonable theory, an exception to the general Walsh thinking, then why not expand this further? It seems that the "impossible" 2S is not so impossible. Why not, in theory, 1H-P-1NT-P-2H-P-2S with 4-0-3-6 pattern? Focus the clubs, but mention the spades. Could not partner have 4-6-3-0?
If you take this out, then any 4-6 holding could be handled this way, and perhaps even 4-1-3-5 (perhaps passing 2D but converting 2H to 2S).
I am not sure where this thinking leads me, but the thinking is nonetheless suggested. Namely, there is nothing "impossible" about the "impossible" 2S. "
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Richard Pavlicek has posted this ( earlier in rec.games.bridge ) as an alternative :
1H - 1NT!
2H - 2S! = 5/5 in the minors
Page 1 of 1
Impossible Spade ( for Ken Rexford )
#1
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 835
- Joined: 2009-May-03
Posted 2010-October-21, 09:12
Don Stenmark ( TWOferBRIDGE )
#2
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 2,208
- Joined: 2007-July-01
- Gender:Male
- Location:Michigan
- Interests:Science, Sports
Posted 2010-October-21, 09:25
In one partnership I have we actually don't play Impossible 2♠ anymore either.
1♥-2♠ is natural, invitational
1♥-1♠; 2X-2♠ is an artificial GF
1♥-1NT; 2X-2♠ is weak with spades.
1♥-2♠ is natural, invitational
1♥-1♠; 2X-2♠ is an artificial GF
1♥-1NT; 2X-2♠ is weak with spades.
Kevin Fay
#3
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 2,681
- Joined: 2008-April-06
Posted 2010-October-21, 10:51
Agree with kfay. I'd much rather have a bid for weak hand, long spades, than a weak 4x(6x). OK, you can use another sequence, but there aren't any spare bids !
#4
- Brain Farts and Actual Farts Increasing with Age
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 9,586
- Joined: 2005-September-21
- Gender:Male
- Location:Lima, Allen County, North-West-Central Ohio, USA
- Interests:www.limadbc.blogspot.com editor/contributor
Posted 2010-October-21, 13:15
FWIW, the idea of using 2♠ as an artificial bid may still be superior to any natural meaning. But, it seemed to me humorous to call the call an "impossible" 2♠ when in fact it seemed that the premise was faulty. If one then assumes "if could be natural is natural," then the delayed 2♠ would seem to have this very meaning.
I remain uncertain as to merits of anything these days, let alone in this area.
I remain uncertain as to merits of anything these days, let alone in this area.
"Gibberish in, gibberish out. A trial judge, three sets of lawyers, and now three appellate judges cannot agree on what this law means. And we ask police officers, prosecutors, defense lawyers, and citizens to enforce or abide by it? The legislature continues to write unreadable statutes. Gibberish should not be enforced as law."
-P.J. Painter.
-P.J. Painter.
#5
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 4,096
- Joined: 2009-January-18
- Gender:Male
- Location:Vancouver WA USA
Posted 2010-October-21, 16:07
kfay, on 2010-October-21, 09:25, said:
In one partnership I have we actually don't play Impossible 2♠ anymore either.
1♥-2♠ is natural, invitational
1♥-1♠; 2X-2♠ is an artificial GF
1♥-1NT; 2X-2♠ is weak with spades.
1♥-2♠ is natural, invitational
1♥-1♠; 2X-2♠ is an artificial GF
1♥-1NT; 2X-2♠ is weak with spades.
This is what Meckwell play, except that 1H-2S is constructive and 1H-1S, 2L-3S is invitational
Page 1 of 1