BBO Discussion Forums: Clubs - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Clubs From the Club

Poll: Bodding Problem (18 member(s) have cast votes)

What do you do?

  1. Pass (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  2. 1 Club (9 votes [50.00%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 50.00%

  3. 2 Clubs (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  4. 3 Clubs (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  5. 4 Clubs (1 votes [5.56%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 5.56%

  6. 5 Clubs (8 votes [44.44%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 44.44%

  7. 6 Clubs (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  8. 7 Clubs (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#21 User is offline   pilowsky 

  • pilowsky
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,539
  • Joined: 2019-October-04
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia
  • Interests:Writing, Learning, History, Politics

Posted 2021-June-10, 18:05

The final outcome:
Spoiler

non est deus ex machina; även maskiner behöver lite kärlek, J'ai toujours misé sur l'étrange gentillesse des robots.
0

#22 User is offline   helene_t 

  • The Abbess
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 16,388
  • Joined: 2004-April-22
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Hamilton, New Zealand

Posted 2021-June-10, 18:41

Maybe North should pass over the 2 opening, based on the theory that the way to show a constructive hand over their strong opening is by passing first.

Without that agreement, I think North has enough to double 5.

I am not sure if South should bid 5 anyway, assuming that he expects West to have a normal 2 opening. North's red/white 4 bid should be sound enough that 5 should have a chance, maybe, but on the other hand, partner's preempt made opps make the last guess, and bidding 5 now might lift opps into a makeable slam.
When did pass become a 4-letter word? --- WinstonM
0

#23 User is offline   AL78 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 995
  • Joined: 2019-October-13

Posted 2021-June-11, 03:20

View Posthelene_t, on 2021-June-10, 18:41, said:

Without that agreement, I think North has enough to double 5.


With three aces (including the ace of trumps) and Kx sat over a supposedly strong opener, can I ask what more you would need to double 5?
1

#24 User is offline   pilowsky 

  • pilowsky
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,539
  • Joined: 2019-October-04
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia
  • Interests:Writing, Learning, History, Politics

Posted 2021-June-11, 04:32

View PostAL78, on 2021-June-11, 03:20, said:

With three aces (including the ace of trumps) and Kx sat over a supposedly strong opener, can I ask what more you would need to double 5?


Bigger...
non est deus ex machina; även maskiner behöver lite kärlek, J'ai toujours misé sur l'étrange gentillesse des robots.
0

#25 User is offline   helene_t 

  • The Abbess
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 16,388
  • Joined: 2004-April-22
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Hamilton, New Zealand

Posted 2021-June-11, 04:53

View Postshyams, on 2021-June-10, 11:06, said:

If E/W described the 2 opening as "strong" with no other caveats or clarifications, I feel that N/S have a right to claim that West psyched. I cannot see why a Director would then not rule against E/W and in favour of N/S.

But if 2 was a psyche (and the local regulations allow the psyching of strong 2 openings), there's no problem.

The TD needs to establish if EW have an implicit agreement to open 2 with this kind of hands. In than case there's misinformation (and possibly an illegal agreement, but Australia is quite liberal so that's probably not the case)
When did pass become a 4-letter word? --- WinstonM
0

#26 User is offline   pescetom 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,638
  • Joined: 2014-February-18
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Italy

Posted 2021-June-11, 07:33

View Posthelene_t, on 2021-June-11, 04:53, said:

But if 2 was a psyche (and the local regulations allow the psyching of strong 2 openings), there's no problem.

The TD needs to establish if EW have an implicit agreement to open 2 with this kind of hands. In than case there's misinformation (and possibly an illegal agreement, but Australia is quite liberal so that's probably not the case)


I had a quick look through the ABF System Regulations 2017 and it seems WBF based similar to the Italian Regulations, although more detailed and practical. I saw nothing that disallowed any particular agreement for 2 opening, brown stickers aside. The psyching of strong 2 openings is explicitly forbidden however:

9.6 The psyching of a conventional bid, which is unequivocally forcing and systematically indicative of the
strongest possible opening hand (e.g., a Game Forcing 2 or a Precision 1) is strictly forbidden.


The ABF Alerting Regulations 2017 also say that:

5.1(d) Strong artificial 2♣, 2♦ openings are alertable.

so you are definitely due an alert and clear explanation of the agreement (Italian regulations allow an announcement of "Strong" if the agreement is game forcing, whatever the TD may deem that to mean).
1

#27 User is offline   gszes 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,599
  • Joined: 2011-February-12

Posted 2021-June-11, 14:24

if rho had not been a passed hand I would open 5c. I chose 1c because the odds are in our favor of making game atm and I see no strong reason to preempt partner. I will undoubtedly come to regret this decision (sigh).
0

#28 User is offline   gszes 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,599
  • Joined: 2011-February-12

Posted 2021-June-11, 14:48

I do not see why north was in such a hurry to bid 4s. This bid at unfavorable might be nothing more than KQJxxxxxx void xx xx. I see little reason to preempt the opps here. Any contract N does not wish to x they can bid 4 or even 5s later in the bidding if need be. The delayed bid should be read by partner as strong in the sense that N expects to come pretty darn close to making the delayed bid in their own hand (else a preempt immediately).
0

#29 User is offline   gszes 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,599
  • Joined: 2011-February-12

Posted 2021-June-11, 14:58

Having already bid 4s I see little option but to x 5c. I do not know if this will perk up partner, but it should at least convince them that 5s seems reasonable, since their large fit will surely negate at least 1 if not 2 defensive tricks N might be counting on. I knew I would regret opening 1 measly club but I admit the thought of opening 2c was never seriously considered even when I saw it as an option.
0

#30 User is offline   sfi 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,167
  • Joined: 2009-May-18
  • Location:Oz

Posted 2021-June-11, 17:08

View Postpescetom, on 2021-June-11, 07:33, said:

I had a quick look through the ABF System Regulations 2017 and it seems WBF based similar to the Italian Regulations, although more detailed and practical. I saw nothing that disallowed any particular agreement for 2 opening, brown stickers aside. The psyching of strong 2 openings is explicitly forbidden however:

9.6 The psyching of a conventional bid, which is unequivocally forcing and systematically indicative of the
strongest possible opening hand (e.g., a Game Forcing 2 or a Precision 1) is strictly forbidden.


The ABF Alerting Regulations 2017 also say that:

5.1(d) Strong artificial 2♣, 2♦ openings are alertable.

so you are definitely due an alert and clear explanation of the agreement (Italian regulations allow an announcement of "Strong" if the agreement is game forcing, whatever the TD may deem that to mean).

You can play whatever you like for 2C here as long as it's not totally destructive (section 2.6 in that document). If 2C doesn't show clubs, you need to alert it though. And you don't get to describe the original hand as "strong" without risk of a MI-related ruling.
0

#31 User is offline   pilowsky 

  • pilowsky
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,539
  • Joined: 2019-October-04
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia
  • Interests:Writing, Learning, History, Politics

Posted 2021-June-11, 21:55

View Postsfi, on 2021-June-11, 17:08, said:

You can play whatever you like for 2C here as long as it's not totally destructive (section 2.6 in that document). If 2C doesn't show clubs, you need to alert it though. And you don't get to describe the original hand as "strong" without risk of a MI-related ruling.


So, what is your conclusion re this hand?
non est deus ex machina; även maskiner behöver lite kärlek, J'ai toujours misé sur l'étrange gentillesse des robots.
0

#32 User is offline   pilowsky 

  • pilowsky
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,539
  • Joined: 2019-October-04
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia
  • Interests:Writing, Learning, History, Politics

Posted 2021-June-20, 03:49


Two days later! but this time I was ready.
Different opps.
IMP's


The full deal
Spoiler

non est deus ex machina; även maskiner behöver lite kärlek, J'ai toujours misé sur l'étrange gentillesse des robots.
0

#33 User is offline   pescetom 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,638
  • Joined: 2014-February-18
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Italy

Posted 2021-June-20, 06:35

No apparent MI this time. But if their agreement is based on losers it looks a bit odd to pass 5♧.
0

Share this topic:


  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users