[kgr]

IMP's

---

Your Call?

[Fluffy]

First pass is clear IMO, the econd one is more debatable lacking defensive quick tricks but -160 ain't the end of the world

[kgr]

Fluffy, on 2011-March-06, 09:56, said:

First pass is clear IMO, the second one is more debatable lacking defensive quick tricks but -160 ain't the end of the world

I'm surprised by this. I would think that you only pass initially if you want to pass again when partner DBL's & if you don't want to Pass again then it is better to start with 1NT to show your pnt range? So I would think that if the 1st pass is clear then the 2nd is also clear?

[aguahombre]

kgr, on 2011-March-06, 10:07, said:

I'm surprised by this. I would think that you only pass initially if you want to pass again when partner DBL's & if you don't want to Pass again then it is better to start with 1NT to show your pnt range? So I would think that if the 1st pass is clear then the 2nd is also clear?

Those thoughts went thru my alledged mind, and I might apply them to this one. But 1NT does have some flaws, so passing and then dogging it with 1NT after the reopening double might work also.

[Fluffy]

yes when you consider this hand worth 8 HCP, but the honnors are so bad I consider downgrading it to the 2-6 range where pass then 1NT happens

[Free]

This hand is worth a lot less than 8HCP, all sorts of downgrades, especially since our own suit is useless. I'd pass first, and rebid 1NT if partner Doubles. Since it's imps, I kind of like 2♣ instead of 1NT, the chance is huge that partner has 5 of them, and we have ruffing values and some ♥ stuffing.

[kgr]

---

We were lucky that opps saved us from 3♦X to 4♦X and misplayed to go -1

[whereagles]

None of the above:

Pass + 2♣ over pard's take out dbl, since pard rates to have 1444 or 1435/1345.

[the hog]

Pass followed by 1NT looks totally obvious. Why pass first? To slow down the auction; also there is no guarantee that partner will make a t/o double.
To show how fatuous it is to make a penalty pass the second time around, look at the actual hand.

[Lurpoa]

kgr, on 2011-March-06, 05:19, said:

IMP's

---

Your Call?

Pass.
P will always double, if my LHO keeps quiet.
And Pass again: It looks like I have 4 (4.5) assured tricks.
At the worst it is 1S=.

[Lurpoa]

the hog, on 2011-March-08, 18:37, said:

Pass followed by 1NT looks totally obvious. Why pass first? To slow down the auction; also there is no guarantee that partner will make a t/o double.
To show how fatuous it is to make a penalty pass the second time around, look at the actual hand.

No, this cannot be a good action.
What has P do think about that ?
Playing Negative doubles, your pass on the first round "could be" a penalty pass.
You were unable to bid 1NT on first round and now you deny a penalty pass.
Your 1NT bid cannot be a proposal to play there. To me it is a take out for the other 2 colors.

[mtvesuvius]

Lurpoa, on 2011-March-09, 00:04, said:

No, this cannot be a good action.
What has P do think about that ?
Playing Negative doubles, your pass on the first round "could be" a penalty pass.
You were unable to bid 1NT on first round and now you deny a penalty pass.
Your 1NT bid cannot be a proposal to play there. To me it is a take out for the other 2 colors.

You've never held a balanced 7 count with a stopper before?

FWIW I agree w/the hog here, although the actual hand is a bit atypical.

[aguahombre]

Lurpoa, on 2011-March-09, 00:04, said:

Playing Negative doubles, your pass on the first round "could be" a penalty pass.
You were unable to bid 1NT on first round and now you deny a penalty pass.
Your 1NT bid cannot be a proposal to play there. To me it is a take out for the other 2 colors.

considering that advancer passed the overcall, and that partner is reopening with a double, (try not to be influenced by this exact holding of 6 cards in their suit), you are much more likely to hold a relatively balanced hand below the standard 8-count (good 7), than to hold support for both unbid suits and not made a neg double. If you do have that, you can chose a suit. But if you have the weak balanced 1NT hand type, you have nowhere to go.


So, on frequency, your idea of an artificial 1NT is less useful than a natural weak 1NT.

[Lurpoa]

mtvesuvius, on 2011-March-09, 01:10, said:

You've never held a balanced 7 count with a stopper before?

FWIW I agree w/the hog here, although the actual hand is a bit atypical.

? I do not understand your comments.
So,... why not an immediate 1NT, no need to wait till partner doubles.....

[Lurpoa]

aguahombre, on 2011-March-09, 11:25, said:

considering that advancer passed the overcall, and that partner is reopening with a double, (try not to be influenced by this exact holding of 6 cards in their suit), you are much more likely to hold a relatively balanced hand below the standard 8-count (good 7), than to hold support for both unbid suits and not made a neg double. If you do have that, you can chose a suit. But if you have the weak balanced 1NT hand type, you have nowhere to go.


So, on frequency, your idea of an artificial 1NT is less useful than a natural weak 1NT.

Yes.
If you pass the 1♠ overcall, and seen your length in ♠, it is 99% sure that partner will double, to protect you against a penalty pass....
You can not stand that penalty pass.
So... i think it is better to bid 1NT immediately: at leat P know that you have 6+ H and a stopper.......
No ?

[Lurpoa]

aguahombre, on 2011-March-09, 11:25, said:

considering that advancer passed the overcall, and that partner is reopening with a double, (try not to be influenced by this exact holding of 6 cards in their suit), you are much more likely to hold a relatively balanced hand below the standard 8-count (good 7), than to hold support for both unbid suits and not made a neg double. If you do have that, you can chose a suit. But if you have the weak balanced 1NT hand type, you have nowhere to go.


So, on frequency, your idea of an artificial 1NT is less useful than a natural weak 1NT.

What I mean is:
Or you decide you want to penalize the overcaller and you pass (partner will/must double !).
Or you do not want to risk a 1♠X= and you bid 1NT immediately
A delayed 1NTbid makes no sense, unless it is a T/O for the minors (unlikely !).

[Fluffy]

Lurpoa, on 2011-March-10, 02:22, said:

? I do not understand your comments.
So,... why not an immediate 1NT, no need to wait till partner doubles.....

Cos that shows about 8-10 points you do not have

[Lurpoa]

Fluffy, on 2011-March-10, 03:03, said:

Cos that shows about 8-10 points you do not have

Any good reason to play a direct 1NT as 8-10 ?
I use to play it 6-9 (10)... Any reason to change this after the overcall ? Any references on that ?
It certainly is not specified that this should change in the SAYC booklet or in BWS2001.

[mtvesuvius]

Lurpoa, on 2011-March-10, 03:13, said:

Any good reason to play a direct 1NT as 8-10 ?
I use to play it 6-9 (10)... Any reason to change this after the overcall ? Any references on that ?
It certainly is not specified that this should change in the SAYC booklet or in BWS2001.

BWS2001 is not god. Nor is SAYC. Maybe spaghetti monsters, but I digress...

Anyway, the overall allows us to not be forced into bidding 1N on 6-7 HCP hands, which rarely play well, and if penalized can often be quite a massacre. Reserving 1N for constructive 8-10 hands allows you to bid better both constructively and defensively.

The 6-7 HCP hands aren't really thrilled about bidding the first time, but now they have to find a call. In this case, that is 1N.

[Lurpoa]

mtvesuvius, on 2011-March-10, 06:39, said:

BWS2001 is not god. Nor is SAYC. Maybe spaghetti monsters, but I digress...

Anyway, the overall allows us to not be forced into bidding 1N on 6-7 HCP hands, which rarely play well, and if penalized can often be quite a massacre. Reserving 1N for constructive 8-10 hands allows you to bid better both constructively and defensively.

The 6-7 HCP hands aren't really thrilled about bidding the first time, but now they have to find a call. In this case, that is 1N.

no, no Gods. .
but at the least authorative guidelines !!! We all can learn a lot from our Masters.

I did some internet-research on that free bid of 1NT. I found some sources who defend the 8-10 version, but at least as many consider the 1NT response as unchanged.
I understand part of your arguments; but I see also the added stress to find a response on 6-7H hands.

Without choosing for one or other option, I would consider, that, if no special agreements have been made with partner, the 1NT bid is 6(6good)-10H.