[MFA]

Quote

First you are losing the whole point of preempting when you do it with 2N and give them an easy cuebid, a pass and then balance, a X and then balance, etc.

Agree, but how do people exploit that lovely extra bidding room?

My partnership uses this strategy:

X = Take-out, could be rather light (lovely to be able to t/o double and still sell out to 3mi if that seems best).

X + X = Take-out again. Extra values obviously.
P + X = Penalty.
X + bid = Forcing.
Bid = Better than P + bid.

---
In general we always use X of an artficial bid/raise in competition as "take-out of what they have shown".

For instance: Namyats, Bergen raises, 1x - (1y) - pass - (2x) Dbl, etc.
Very useful to be able to take-out double without actually having to enter the bidding in dangerous situations. Much better than the usual lead direction treatments, we think.

Against Namyats, it works like this:
X of 4mi is a shape take-out of 4Ma - could be aggressive because of the safety.
X+X: Shape takeout with extras
P+X: Balanced take-out (~ strong notrump type).
I find this defense so strong that Namyats becomes almost unplayable.

[mycroft]

1m-X-2NT "preemptive or GF" vs. rightsiding - depends on how many times opener can go to 3NT opposite a preemptive hand. Which depends on your basic system and strength of the "strong bid", and the holes in your NT ladder that correspond to 1m, then xNT.

If responder has the GF case, the strength is (at 3NT) relatively equal, and there should be tenaces over the doubler, so the "leading through" aspect isn't as prominent, nor is the "hide the strong hand". And fourth hand's only entry is likely to be in the long suit, so if you can hold up...

I don't think it's that much of a loss. However, I think the whole concept of flip flop Dormer is memory work that would give greater returns in another part of my system.

Michael.

[junyi_zhu]

Jlall, on Jan 26 2007, 04:47 PM, said:

I've been trying to figure out why flip flop for the minors is so popular but I can't so maybe you guys can enlighten me. I understand that the upside is that opener is more likely to play the hand in 3N (it's more likely he has a 3N bid over a limit raise) with flip flop.

However, it seems like there are two much bigger issues than right siding the contract. First you are losing the whole point of preempting when you do it with 2N and give them an easy cuebid, a pass and then balance, a X and then balance, etc. The great thing about the 3D bid is that LHO with a mediumish hand has to guess whether to bid or pass, either could work badly on the wrong day, and flip flop negates that whole advantage. Also, how does one bid a GF hand with support playing flip flop? Clearly 3D cannot act as limit+ so that means you have to use some bid to show a GF raise, or start with a XX which lets them in easily, let's them preempt you, and doesn't show support. If you use 2N as limit+ then you are much better positioned on a GF hand.

Is rightsiding it every now and then when it's usually irrelevant anyways really worth it?

You can play a raising structure here:
1x double:
2x: simple raise(can be weak if you play those transfer bids)
2x+1: GF raise.
2x+2: invitational.
2x+3: some type of splinter or anything else you like to play.
3x-1: constructive raise with at least 9 trumps.
3x: preemptive.