[pclayton]

Scoring: IMP

---

Pard opens 1♦. Your call?

[the hog]

2D inverted would be nice if available. Without this I bid 2NT. No doubt some bbo genius posters will try 1S.

[pclayton]

Yes 2♦ is inverted, but not game force.

[the hog]

Easy choice then, Phil.

[mike777]

Toy 2S=limit raise

[Free]

2♦

[pbleighton]

Ideal 2D bid.

Peter

[luke warm]

oh what the hell, i'll bid 2nt.. if we end up in nt i want the lead coming at me anyway

[flytoox]

The_Hog, on Dec 29 2004, 09:11 PM, said:

2D inverted would be nice if available. Without this I bid 2NT. No doubt some bbo genius posters will try 1S.

few of the time I agree with ron, hehe.

[inquiry]

3♣ as true limit raise (or the toy 2S limit raise if you play it).

[pclayton]

I think 2♦ is soooo clear (and obvious). OK, I play 3♣ is the limit raise, but the player that held this had wasn't, besides, thats not the point.

The player that held this bid 2N. Moreso, when I asked him about his choice, he felt it was SUPERIOR to 2♦. No kidding! And I have the highest respect for him as well.

I feel that 2N is a serious error. The reasons I don't like it are:

1. Partner will pass 2N on hands like: xx, Axxx, Axxx, KJxx. 2N might make, but +130 is a walk in the park.

2. Pard will bid 3N on hands like: x, Axx, Axxxx, AKxx, where 6♦ is great, but 3N awful. 3♣ isn't forcing either.

I just received the complete 2003 / 2004 Bridge Worlds. It looks like there is a reference to an article that discussed responding to invitational 2N calls. I need to check this out; but I think it involves showing major suit shortness.

[inquiry]

pclayton, on Dec 30 2004, 01:09 AM, said:

I think 2♦ is soooo clear (and obvious). OK, I play 3♣ is the limit raise, but the player that held this had wasn't, besides, thats not the point.

Misho and I have agreed NOT to bid 2NT with balanced hand with five card minor support when limit raise (criss-cross) is available.