[ArcLight]

Bbradley62, on 2011-March-15, 15:08, said:

1. Frances: OP is from New Jersey... entirely different scale for behavior. (I lived there for 9 years.)
2. OP: Instead of starting with an attack, you could have asked pard what his sequence showed. It shouldn't take long before you get to "either you have game-forcing values opposite a minimum opener or you don't". Also, you cannot compare your partner's sequence to auctions at other tables without knowing what systems were being played there. In MBC, many pairs will be playing SAYC, so 2♣ would have different requirements for them.

It's funny that you tell us "I ended up with 12 tricks. The clubs rolled in (I had Ax and ruffed them good after pulling trumps)", without bothering to include the fact that opps had cashable ♦AK, so 6♠ was a terrible contract, or that you won 3+ IMPs on the board.

PS: I'd bid 2/1GF even with ♦xxx instead of ♦Qxx, but my regular partner doesn't open dreck.

---

It's not that s;lam as so good, it was lucky, it was the 1Nt bid I was disappointed with. I'm not saying we would have eneded up in slam, or whether its a good one. With a somewhat better hand, slam could be great.

Also - living in New Jersey doesn't mean one is mor eor less polite, though there are probably a highe rconcentration of impolite people in teh Metro New York region.
I think you are generalizing, and I don't think the way I phrased my comment was an attack.
Had I said' Pard you misbid that, it was obviously a 2 Club response" I think that would have been more in your face.

I specifically said 2/1 bidding in the topic description. Not SAYC.


>>OP: Instead of starting with an attack, you could have asked pard what his sequence showed. It shouldn't take long before you get to "either you have game-forcing values opposite a minimum opener or you don'

Hmm, maybe thats a better way of asking, as its even more neutral.
I like that! Thanks for the suggestion

[Free]

With what purpose did you post the complete story? You were right that 2♣ is a much better call than 1NT, that much is proven. But that doesn't justify your table manners. And if one or more people point that out to you, all of a sudden you feel the need to go bezerk. Chill out dude.

I'll shut up now in the hope to avoid more of your PM's.

Name calling removed to save Ben some work.

[dustinst22]

Free, on 2011-March-16, 03:18, said:

After seeing the hand I wonder what he actually said. Since you conveniently avoided telling us that you missed a terrible slam, you might have conveniently skipped this part as well.

I don't think Arc ever made the claim they belonged in slam. I think his point is, 1NT poorly described his partner's hand and could easily have caused them to miss a good contract (whether it be a game or slam). Certainly as Opener, 1NT wouldn't exactly inspire me to explore slam.

[the hog]

dustinst22, on 2011-March-16, 17:34, said:

I don't think Arc ever made the claim they belonged in slam. I think his point is, 1NT poorly described his partner's hand and could easily have caused them to miss a good contract (whether it be a game or slam). Certainly as Opener, 1NT wouldn't exactly inspire me to explore slam.

Good thing too; even game is not 100% on this hand. To say a slam made is a ridiculous comment.
I would bid 2C, buit really would not quibble too much about 1NT; it is not a "great" hand.

[Siegmund]

Quote

PS: I'd bid 2/1GF even with ♦xxx instead of ♦Qxx

Put me down for that too. Distribution matters, when you've got a nice fit and guaranteed entries. Now, maybe your partnership agrees to put some game-forcing hands through 1NT and if so thats OK (he DID jump to 4M after a minimum rebid from you), but I do think responder has a game force and then some.

[tolvyrj]

Errare humanum est said the romans. The difference between experts and the rest of the lot is not that they dont make mistakes; they just dont make so many mistakes.
Wheter u right or wrong in 2♣ response is not the issue here, at lesat not the biggest issue.If u prd makes a mistake s/he will either know it, in case its pointless to rub his/hers nose in it; or s/he does not understand it, in which case its even more futile to nack about it, cause u wont have time for theory lessons in the middle of the game huh.
Keep u prd happy, npp and face r good policy. It will rewrd u handsomly in a long run believe me.

[inquiry]

First, I am at the nationals in Kentucky right now, and don't have time to edit all the responses and other post quoting earlier post where one person suggested another was acting like a jerk or similar (perhaps actually called them a jerk). Or to edit out the name in the hand posted of the players at the table, which by implication at the very least the OP was calling something similar to a jerk.

Let me just say, rain and I have noted the comments, and perhaps when I am not in such need of rest I might come back and prune this thread, or might not. But please, lets try to play nice.

As for this hand, I have no strong opinion one way or the other about which bid is right, 1NT, 2C or even 3S despite the fact that bid "promises" 4. card support. I would not comment on any of the three bids if my partner choose to bid them. I think I woujld bid 2C but I am not so sure as to stat "I know I'm right".

[Lurpoa]

ArcLight, on 2011-March-15, 06:42, said:

All White, Imps

Pard deals and opens 1 Spade

What do you respond with:

S: K T x
H: A
D: Q x x
C: K x x x x x


(2C, 1NT forcing, Other - if so what)
(3S shows 4+ Spades so that bid is out. )

Yes, this is a GFhand (ten of ♠ is very helpfull).

In BWS2001 1NT, is only semi forcing, and a direct raise or 2NT bid would guarantee a 4card: so 2♣.



Playing SAYC, I guess 4♠, although this hand is really maximum,would be the best bid.

[y66]

I understand booting people from a table is subjective. But I don't understand 1N there at all. How do 1N bidders continue after 1S 1N 2C?