What is this convention?
#1
Posted 2010-July-22, 09:29
After 1m-1M-2M (m being a minor suit, M being same major, no opposition bidding), 2NT shows an at least invitatinal hand and asks about the quality of opener's hand and major suit. The responses are as follows:
3C=3 card support and minimum
3D=3 card support and maximum
3H=4 card support and minimum
3S=4 card support and maximum
Note: It is possible that this description is not totally accurate.
Is anyone familiar with this convention, know it's name, or where I can learn more about it? If you are familiar with it, do you have any comments or criticisms of it?
#2
Posted 2010-July-22, 09:36
if you have a good good hand with 4 cards, you can also splinter with it to the 4 level.
George Carlin
#3
Posted 2010-July-22, 09:44
Supposed to handle a 1M - 2M hand where 2M is constructive and opener has a couple of equal choices of help suit tries.
That one doesn't have a name either.
What is baby oil made of?
#4
Posted 2010-July-22, 09:45
Can't help you with any references other than my own experience and the fact that a number of better players use this gadget.
#5
Posted 2010-July-22, 09:47
I prefer 1m 1M 2M 2M+1 to be the ask.
There are better responses to the ask than those, but those are good because theyre easy to remember.
bed
#6
Posted 2010-July-22, 09:52
jjbrr, on Jul 22 2010, 09:47 AM, said:
I prefer 1m 1M 2M 2M+1 to be the ask.
There are better responses to the ask than those, but those are good because theyre easy to remember.
In fact, I know Gavin likes them, and he described them on his site:
Gavin's site
Edit: And Paul Bethe describes the method in OP as "Limited Meckwell"
the more you know...
bed
#7
Posted 2010-July-22, 10:00
Most good pairs use a toy along these lines to ask about the raise. It is very effective and can be used with any hand invitational or stronger. I like it a lot.
#8
Posted 2010-July-22, 10:11
"Robin Barker is a mathematician. ... All highly skilled in their respective fields and clearly accomplished bridge players."
#10
Posted 2010-July-22, 12:09
As already mentioned, if you're going to play this, there are probably better responses to it, but it does have the merit of being simple.
#11
Posted 2010-July-22, 15:57
ggwhiz, on Jul 22 2010, 11:44 AM, said:
Supposed to handle a 1M - 2M hand where 2M is constructive and opener has a couple of equal choices of help suit tries.
That one doesn't have a name either.
That's Kokish Game Tries. If opener bids a suit instead of 2NT, that's a short suit game try in that suit.
#12
Posted 2010-July-22, 17:07
To be frank, the convention's "name" is irrelevant other than as a shorthand method for a new partnership to hack together a system in a short amount of time prior to play. Some of the problems with this are
1) Quite often a treatment is invented, usually independently by several separate sources, without bothering to assign a name to it (or assigning several names to it)
2) More critically, there are subtle differences in treatment between various options, all falling under the same "name", such as Lebensohl to name but one.
As to the merits of the particular convention discussed in this thread, I think it may depend on whether you are playing a strong 1N opener or a weak 1N opener, as this may affect the hand types on which you might consider raising responder with only 3 cards.
Psyche (pron. sahy-kee): The human soul, spirit or mind (derived, personification thereof, beloved of Eros, Greek myth).
Masterminding (pron. mstr-mnding) tr. v. - Any bid made by bridge player with which partner disagrees.
"Gentlemen, when the barrage lifts." 9th battalion, King's own Yorkshire light infantry,
2000 years earlier: "morituri te salutant"
"I will be with you, whatever". Blair to Bush, precursor to invasion of Iraq
#13
Posted 2010-July-22, 21:12
1eyedjack, on Jul 22 2010, 05:07 PM, said:
To be frank, the convention's "name" is irrelevant other than as a shorthand method......(snipped)
I disagree. This convention should definitely be assigned a name. Then when it occurs and is alerted (& asked), you have a tremendous advantage.
You can establish intellectual superiority by simply saying the name, as if anyone who is anyone should know it. Then, when the opps have been properly intimidated into asking no further questions, you are free to screw up the auction without risk of UI.
#16
Posted 2010-July-23, 02:47
"Drome" if clicked by an opponent you would state Drome feeling very superior,
I thought the spirit of BBO was to give a full explanation,not wasting time by being a Dick head.
perhaps i may have misintrepted your reply.
#17
Posted 2010-July-23, 02:53
#18
Posted 2010-July-23, 02:57
perhaps newer players would think that is the done thing.
I can Visualise "AQUA" rising to his full height ,
and using his full SUPERIORITY:) regards
#19
Posted 2010-July-23, 05:36
Roland
Sanity Check: Failure (Fluffy)
More system is not the answer...
#20
Posted 2010-July-23, 08:03