Help
Scoring: IMP
Strong opps.
You might ask something like "what are your requirements for (...)?". Pretend you have a meta-agreement with partner that sounds something like "We agree with Robson/Segal".
"type and degree of support"
#1
- Csaba the Hutt
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 13,027
- Joined: 2006-June-16
- Gender:Male
- Interests:bye
Posted 2007-June-06, 22:35
(1♣)-1♠-(X)-?
Strong opps.
You might ask something like "what are your requirements for (...)?". Pretend you have a meta-agreement with partner that sounds something like "We agree with Robson/Segal".
Strong opps.
You might ask something like "what are your requirements for (...)?". Pretend you have a meta-agreement with partner that sounds something like "We agree with Robson/Segal".
... and I can prove it with my usual, flawless logic.
George Carlin
George Carlin
#2
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 17,028
- Joined: 2003-October-07
- Gender:Male
Posted 2007-June-06, 23:46
gwnn, on Jun 6 2007, 11:35 PM, said:
(1♣)-1♠-(X)-?
<!-- ONEHAND begin --><table border='1'> <tr> <td> <table> <tr> <td> Dealer: </td> <td> West </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Vul: </td> <td> None </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Scoring: </td> <td> IMP </td> </tr> </table> </td> <td> <table> <tr> <th> <span class='spades'> ♠ </span> </th> <td> A863 </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='hearts'> ♥ </span> </th> <td> J7 </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='diamonds'> ♦ </span> </th> <td> KQ54 </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='clubs'> ♣ </span> </th> <td> JT5 </td> </tr> </table> </td> <td> </td> </tr> </table><!-- ONEHAND end -->
Strong opps.
You might ask something like "what are your requirements for (...)?". Pretend you have a meta-agreement with partner that sounds something like "We agree with Robson/Segal".
<!-- ONEHAND begin --><table border='1'> <tr> <td> <table> <tr> <td> Dealer: </td> <td> West </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Vul: </td> <td> None </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Scoring: </td> <td> IMP </td> </tr> </table> </td> <td> <table> <tr> <th> <span class='spades'> ♠ </span> </th> <td> A863 </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='hearts'> ♥ </span> </th> <td> J7 </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='diamonds'> ♦ </span> </th> <td> KQ54 </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='clubs'> ♣ </span> </th> <td> JT5 </td> </tr> </table> </td> <td> </td> </tr> </table><!-- ONEHAND end -->
Strong opps.
You might ask something like "what are your requirements for (...)?". Pretend you have a meta-agreement with partner that sounds something like "We agree with Robson/Segal".
OoooPPs a simple 2clubs is forbodden! RATS!
2c
edit btw I think all the choices are goofy/silly..please play them
Have no idea what our meta stuff is...
I cuebid.
If my wc partner is confused...blame me.
#3
- Csaba the Hutt
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 13,027
- Joined: 2006-June-16
- Gender:Male
- Interests:bye
Posted 2007-June-07, 01:13
Oops. forgot 2♣ out 
2♣ would be "nice hand with 3 card support, or 4 card support with low ODR".
I think that's a little harsh, but maybe it's just me.
2♣ would be "nice hand with 3 card support, or 4 card support with low ODR".
Quote
btw I think all the choices are goofy/silly..please play them
... and I can prove it with my usual, flawless logic.
George Carlin
George Carlin
#4
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 17,028
- Joined: 2003-October-07
- Gender:Male
Posted 2007-June-07, 01:41
gwnn, on Jun 7 2007, 02:13 AM, said:
Oops. forgot 2♣ out
2♣ would be "nice hand with 3 card support, or 4 card support with low ODR".
I think that's a little harsh, but maybe it's just me.
2♣ would be "nice hand with 3 card support, or 4 card support with low ODR".
Quote
btw I think all the choices are goofy/silly..please play them
I am exhausted by all the choices....
Can i just bid 2 clubs...not an option?
I have no idea what odr/monkey.=/jump fit////etc is .... or whatever is.......
I repeat i bid 2clubs...
If my world class partner is confused...blame me.
#5
- mmm Duvel
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 10,728
- Joined: 2003-July-30
- Gender:Male
- Location:Belgium
- Interests:Duvel, Whisky
Posted 2007-June-07, 01:50
I don't think this hand is very offensive to say the least, so 2NT is imo an overbid. 2♣ or 3♣ are both better bids imo, 2♣ probably the best.
"It may be rude to leave to go to the bathroom, but it's downright stupid to sit there and piss yourself" - blackshoe
#6
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 2,085
- Joined: 2004-March-26
- Location:Israel
Posted 2007-June-07, 02:20
This hand is somewhere between 2♣ and 2NT.
It is not a 3♣ because 3♣ hands should be more shapy with less HCP.
It might be a matter of overcall style and maybe even the vul, for me i think its good enough for 2NT.
It is not a 3♣ because 3♣ hands should be more shapy with less HCP.
It might be a matter of overcall style and maybe even the vul, for me i think its good enough for 2NT.
#7
- World International Master without a clue
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 17,404
- Joined: 2003-November-13
- Gender:Male
- Location:madrid
Posted 2007-June-07, 02:25
2♣ for me too lol
#8
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 3,162
- Joined: 2006-July-10
- Gender:Male
- Location:Maryland
Posted 2007-June-07, 07:09
You really didn't have to list 1NT, 3♥, and 3NT as options in this poll.
#9
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 3,162
- Joined: 2006-July-10
- Gender:Male
- Location:Maryland
Posted 2007-June-07, 07:11
I would use a 4-card limit raise if one was available. It's not clear whether 2NT as described means "limit+" or not. If so, I bid 2NT, else I bid 2♣.
#10
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 9,151
- Joined: 2003-June-11
- Location:Southern California
Posted 2007-June-07, 09:15
The nice thing about having mixed raises in your arsenal is that you no longer have to stretch to show a 4 card limit raise. This, to me, is a max mixed raise, not a min limit raise.
"Phil" on BBO
#11
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 3,937
- Joined: 2004-June-05
Posted 2007-June-07, 09:36
Flame, on Jun 7 2007, 03:20 AM, said:
It is not a 3♣ because 3♣ hands should be more shapy with less HCP.
I don't think I understand the options.
3 clubs is a mixed raise, 2NT is an offensive limit raise.
Doesn't that mean that 2NT is more shapy than 3 clubs?
#12
- Csaba the Hutt
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 13,027
- Joined: 2006-June-16
- Gender:Male
- Interests:bye
Posted 2007-June-07, 10:06
Apollo81, on Jun 7 2007, 03:09 PM, said:
You really didn't have to list 1NT, 3♥, and 3NT as options in this poll.
Yea.. And 2♣ would have had its place.
I'll make a better poll next time.
... and I can prove it with my usual, flawless logic.
George Carlin
George Carlin
#13
- mmm Duvel
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 10,728
- Joined: 2003-July-30
- Gender:Male
- Location:Belgium
- Interests:Duvel, Whisky
Posted 2007-June-07, 10:59
gwnn, on Jun 7 2007, 05:06 PM, said:
Apollo81, on Jun 7 2007, 03:09 PM, said:
You really didn't have to list 1NT, 3♥, and 3NT as options in this poll.
Yea.. And 2♣ would have had its place.
I'll make a better poll next time.
and always include a "other" option
"It may be rude to leave to go to the bathroom, but it's downright stupid to sit there and piss yourself" - blackshoe
#14
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 875
- Joined: 2006-June-08
Posted 2007-June-07, 11:08
3C
Assuming 2NT is the more shapely raise - otherwise vice versa.
Assuming 2NT is the more shapely raise - otherwise vice versa.
#15
- Group: FD TEAM
- Posts: 2,735
- Joined: 2003-February-13
- Gender:Male
- Location:Nashville, TN
- Interests:Motorsports, cricket, disc golf, and of course - bridge. :-)
Posted 2007-June-07, 11:29
I spent 35 minutes on this hand - I finally voted for the mixed raise since I held J♥ and JTx♣.
I don't consider this to be a true offensive hand because a) I lack shortage
I lack intermediates in my 2 prime suit and c) I have three dead clubs, a bad omen.
I don't consider this to be a true offensive hand because a) I lack shortage
I lack intermediates in my 2 prime suit and c) I have three dead clubs, a bad omen.
"Champions aren't made in gyms, champions are made from something they have deep inside them - a desire, a dream, a vision. They have to have last-minute stamina, they have to be a little faster, they have to have the skill and the will. But the will must be stronger than the skill. " - M. Ali
#16
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 3,162
- Joined: 2006-July-10
- Gender:Male
- Location:Maryland
Posted 2007-June-07, 12:35
I strongly disagree with anyone who thinks that this is a mixed raise.
#17 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2007-June-07, 12:57
2C (you said this can contain 4 trumps with low ODR right?),
and to add to apollo's comment... I really really really don't understand calling this a mixed raise. A mixed raise is more like Kxxx x Kxxxx xxx than this balanced 11 count.
and to add to apollo's comment... I really really really don't understand calling this a mixed raise. A mixed raise is more like Kxxx x Kxxxx xxx than this balanced 11 count.
#18
- - - T98765432 AQT8
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 15,085
- Joined: 2005-June-23
- Gender:Male
- Location:Las Vegas, NV
Posted 2007-June-07, 13:07
I second (third?) the 'this is nothing like a mixed raise which is both lighter and more offensive' comments. I don't think this is even a problem hand. If 2♣ can contain four trumps in your system then it seems obvious since the offense is very low. If it can't, then your systematic bid is 2NT and there is no reason to deviate.
Please let me know about any questions or interest or bug reports about GIB.
#19
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 2,085
- Joined: 2004-March-26
- Location:Israel
Posted 2007-June-07, 13:58
keylime you explained why this is not an offensive hand yet choose the mix raize which show exaxtly the opposite.
#20
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 3,937
- Joined: 2004-June-05
Posted 2007-June-07, 13:59
Flame, on Jun 7 2007, 02:58 PM, said:
keylime you explained why this is not an offensive hand yet choose the mix raize which show exaxtly the opposite.
Because the two choices (with 2♣ being off the board) are a "mixed raise" and an "offensive raise". It seems the argument being made here is that an offensive raise is is less offensive than the mixed raise.