[MrAce]

Vampyr, on 2011-July-09, 16:09, said:

Scored by total points.

Thanks

[wyman]

JLOGIC, on 2011-July-09, 04:57, said:

1) 2C overcall is fine to me, pass is also ok, whatever.

2) The negative double is fine to me also.

3) If partner knew the X was t/o, he would bid 2H for sure not 3C. This will lead to 3D most likely, so I don't agree with your analysis

Wow. I guess I need to rethink things quite a bit.
Agree 100% with (3), although we make -1 hearts, so if they judged to saw it off, that would be -500 also. And even -200 would have been a bottom, so they could afford to drop a trick on defense. It's more likely that this will beget 3D though, you are right.
Re: (1), would you overcall 2C with this over 1S, or do you just like doing it over 1D for preemptive reasons? Are you overcalling with this at IMPs? For me this isn't a vulnerable 2C call, but maybe I need to reconsider.
Re: (2), I'd tend to just make a limit raise in diamonds with this hand. Is the X a MP decision, or would you do this at IMPs as well?

[han]

I can't speak for Justin but I think the negative double is completely automatic.

[xxhong]

If this hand is a passer over partner's 2C overcall (possible if you play quite aggressive 2C overcalls), I don't see why I have to bid more over their nonfit 2D rebid later. If you want to bid something over partner's 2C in your style (possible if you play quite sound 2C overcalls ), I don't see why you should pass over the negative double (this allows more information exchange for opps, which may allow them to compete or double you easier in latter bidding rounds). This is quite incoherent IMO to first pass then later double for takeout.
Also, 2D making is only -90 and 2H down 1 is -100. So it is just not my cup of tea to reopen here even in MP and I never think it is a clear cut to double. Also, things can go really bad sometimes when they can double your possible 4-3 fit in 2H with a 5-1 split, which is not a remote possibility at all. The final point is that this double offers more information if they declare and averagely, they may declare more accurately, which also may cost you MPs.

JLOGIC, on 2011-July-09, 04:59, said:

Our minimum is zero, how is this hand minimum? The reason to reopen is that it could easily be our hand for something. partner has indicated values, we have a good hand with a fit for something, it is all the usual reasons to compete.

[FrancesHinden]

xxhong, on 2011-July-11, 11:17, said:

If this hand is a passer over partner's 2C overcall (possible if you play quite aggressive 2C overcalls), I don't see why I have to bid more over their nonfit 2D rebid later. If you want to bid something over partner's 2C in your style (possible if you play quite sound 2C overcalls ), I don't see why you should pass over the negative double (this allows more information exchange for opps, which may allow them to compete or double you easier in latter bidding rounds). This is quite incoherent IMO to first pass then later double for takeout.
Also, 2D making is only -90 and 2H down 1 is -100. So it is just not my cup of tea to reopen here even in MP and I never think it is a clear cut to double. Also, things can go really bad sometimes when they can double your possible 4-3 fit in 2H with a 5-1 split, which is not a remote possibility at all. The final point is that this double offers more information if they declare and averagely, they may declare more accurately, which also may cost you MPs.

Well, the difference between bidding directly over 2C and protecting later is the same as for any protective auction - it shows fewer values. If you bid at once, partner may play you for more and you get too high. Saying that protecting is 'incoherent' is a bit much: it's saying that you should never protect a potential misfit auction which is far too strong a statement.

p.s. as it happens, I probably would have bid had RHO passed over 2C.

[xxhong]

The basic logic is like this, if you are not strong enough to act on the first round (of course, suppose opp has opened), it is very unlikely that you would become strong enough to bid on the next higher bidding round, especially after a nonfit bid. The modern tendency of protecting is actually over aggressive IMO, which may often lead to rather bad results. Anyway, I know my style is not very popular for many. Also, this tendency leads to misses of huge penalty doubles. IMO, this double against 2D really should be based on diamonds. You still may hold something like Axx xxx KQJTx xx and I don't see why you can't take your huge penalty bonus against a potential misfit and after a few rounds of bidding.

FrancesHinden, on 2011-July-15, 00:15, said:

Well, the difference between bidding directly over 2C and protecting later is the same as for any protective auction - it shows fewer values. If you bid at once, partner may play you for more and you get too high. Saying that protecting is 'incoherent' is a bit much: it's saying that you should never protect a potential misfit auction which is far too strong a statement.

p.s. as it happens, I probably would have bid had RHO passed over 2C.

[MrAce]

xxhong, on 2011-July-15, 10:24, said:

The basic logic is like this, if you are not strong enough to act on the first round (of course, suppose opp has opened), it is very unlikely that you would become strong enough to bid on the next higher bidding round, especially after a nonfit bid. The modern tendency of protecting is actually over aggressive IMO, which may often lead to rather bad results. Anyway, I know my style is not very popular for many. Also, this tendency leads to misses of huge penalty doubles. IMO, this double against 2D really should be based on diamonds. You still may hold something like Axx xxx KQJTx xx and I don't see why you can't take your huge penalty bonus against a potential misfit and after a few rounds of bidding.

There are so many things in this post that i disagree, and i dunno which one to start with. Axx xxx KQJTx xx seems like a hard worked to find example, yet it still doesnt make much sense. In order to assume they do not have a major fit pd must have something like 3316 3415 4315 which he would start DBL at the first place. When is the last time u saw anyone getting rich at 2 level doubled partscore at high level games as oppose to pushing opps to one level higher which went down 1 and/or bidding and making partscore ?

And whose basic logic is this that u are talking about which says not to bid later if you are not strong enough to bid previously ? This is like % 100 opposite of the balancing principle, so you are basically against balancing in any form or shape. How about if i tell you 2♣ bidder knowing his pd can and will balance with suitable hands and passed confidently with a lot of hands that he would not otherwise. Which by the way makes his bids more descriptive had he choosed not to pass.

[xxhong]

Well, you can keep playing what you like. Your argument is really weak though. The overcaller may hold many different hand types, including 3-3-2-5 with good clubs. Also, if overcaller has to double with 3-3-1-6 (xxx Kxx x AKJTxx, 3-4-1-5(xxx Kxxx x AKQTx), 4-3-1-5 (Kxxx xxx x AKQTx), 3-3-2-5 (Kxx xxx xx AKQJx) with good clubs, that's a style I really like my opp to play, but not my partner to play. Also, I really don't mind my opps play such a style for not being able to make a penalty double after a pass. I actually have more respect to those who can pass all the way or who can bid 2H over the negative double than those who pass first and double later to take out, which smells very inconsistent.

MrAce, on 2011-July-15, 19:23, said:

There are so many things in this post that i disagree, and i dunno which one to start with. Axx xxx KQJTx xx seems like a hard worked to find example, yet it still doesnt make much sense. In order to assume they do not have a major fit pd must have something like 3316 3415 4315 which he would start DBL at the first place. When is the last time u saw anyone getting rich at 2 level doubled partscore at high level games as oppose to pushing opps to one level higher which went down 1 and/or bidding and making partscore ?

And whose basic logic is this that u are talking about which says not to bid later if you are not strong enough to bid previously ? This is like % 100 opposite of the balancing principle, so you are basically against balancing in any form or shape. How about if i tell you 2♣ bidder knowing his pd can and will balance with suitable hands and passed confidently with a lot of hands that he would not otherwise. Which by the way makes his bids more descriptive had he choosed not to pass.

[Lurpoa]

JLOGIC, on 2011-July-07, 08:33, said:

Of course you have to balance with this.

♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥

WHY ?

[mtvesuvius]

Lurpoa, on 2011-July-17, 23:52, said:

♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥

WHY ?

Since "why" and "we" seem to be the only words you know, perhaps this will help: http://www.talkenglish.com/

[MrAce]

xxhong, on 2011-July-17, 19:13, said:

Well, you can keep playing what you like. Your argument is really weak though. The overcaller may hold many different hand types, including 3-3-2-5 with good clubs. Also, if overcaller has to double with 3-3-1-6 (xxx Kxx x AKJTxx, 3-4-1-5(xxx Kxxx x AKQTx), 4-3-1-5 (Kxxx xxx x AKQTx), 3-3-2-5 (Kxx xxx xx AKQJx) with good clubs, that's a style I really like my opp to play, but not my partner to play. Also, I really don't mind my opps play such a style for not being able to make a penalty double after a pass. I actually have more respect to those who can pass all the way or who can bid 2H over the negative double than those who pass first and double later to take out, which smells very inconsistent.

It is ok to write nonsense, but if u think the more u repeat the less nonsense it will look, u are wrong. 2 people tried to explain you b4 me, u repeat the same thing on and on.

Here is why i call it a nonsense; You say with those hands (xxx Kxx x AKJTxx, xxx Kxxx x AKQTx, Kxxx xxx x AKQTx the overcaller should not DBL and that this is a style u like your opps to play not your pd (correct me if i am wrong pls) So you do not want overcaller to DBL with those hands, and u also do not want his pd to DBL with current hand Kxxxx Axxx majors because this DBL is spared for the hand Axx xx KQJTx xx to come which allows you to make a penalty DBL and be rich in one hand. Again, funny as it is, you speak of inconsistency, yet you seem to live in peace with your pd when opps play 2♦ with their 9 cards fit and when you side has 9 cards major fit close to 10 tricks It is ok though for you and your pd, you will make that penalty DBL when it comes while everyone else will have to pass. Of course just like most of the nonsense i read in the past, you dont fail to call it "STYLE"

And here comes the EXTREME nonsense

xxhong, on 2011-July-17, 19:13, said:

I actually have more respect to those who can pass all the way or who can bid 2H over the negative double than those who pass first and double later to take out, which smells very inconsistent.

Dammit boy! Bidding our 4 card ♥ suit...over the negative DBL...when we have 5♠ !!! You really want to DBL those opponents, dont you ? I never saw anyone b4 who is so imaginative in order to keep his penalty DBL !

Good luck with your STYLE !

[Lurpoa]

mtvesuvius, on 2011-July-17, 23:57, said:

Since "why" and "we" seem to be the only words you know, perhaps this will help: http://www.talkenglish.com/

♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥

Rather rude your mail, isn't it ? and xenophobic... or are we wrong ?
But OK, we forgive you.

We just wanted to know why it is so evident....

As we already said, we do not like Oracles, we only accept them comming from Gods...

[Lurpoa]

MrAce, on 2011-July-18, 00:53, said:

It is ok to write nonsense, but if u think the more u repeat the less nonsense it will look, u are wrong. 2 people tried to explain you b4 me, u repeat the same thing on and on.

Here is why i call it a nonsense; You say with those hands (xxx Kxx x AKJTxx, xxx Kxxx x AKQTx, Kxxx xxx x AKQTx the overcaller should not DBL and that this is a style u like your opps to play not your pd (correct me if i am wrong pls) So you do not want overcaller to DBL with those hands, and u also do not want his pd to DBL with current hand Kxxxx Axxx majors because this DBL is spared for the hand Axx xx KQJTx xx to come which allows you to make a penalty DBL and be rich in one hand. Again, funny as it is, you speak of inconsistency, yet you seem to live in peace with your pd when opps play 2♦ with their 9 cards fit and when you side has 9 cards major fit close to 10 tricks It is ok though for you and your pd, you will make that penalty DBL when it comes while everyone else will have to pass. Of course just like most of the nonsense i read in the past, you dont fail to call it "STYLE"

And here comes the EXTREME nonsense



Dammit boy! Bidding our 4 card ♥ suit...over the negative DBL...when we have 5♠ !!! You really want to DBL those opponents, dont you ? I never saw anyone b4 who is so imaginative in order to keep his penalty DBL !

Good luck with your STYLE !

♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥



Very unpolite post !!!
Know that we are all here to learn and exchange information in a civilized manner.

No, we wish, we could downvote your post !

[MrAce]

Lurpoa, on 2011-July-18, 01:19, said:

♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥



Very unpolite post !!!
Know that we are all here to learn and exchange information in a civilized matter.

No, we wish, we could downvote your post !

You obviously have no idea how it sounds like when i am unpolite, i thought i was as polite as i could be. By the way i am assuming you meant "in a civilized manner". Downvote by you would be my honor, i would screen shot that downvote, print out and hang on my wall proudly. What could terorize me would be an UPVOTE by you.

And who the heck is "We" ? One Lurpoa is enough for each planet in the universe. I am hoping you referred to your ♥ symbols or to your other accounts when said "WE"

And since when downvoting and upvoting people for no particular reason is called "civilized manner" ? Since when changing names and pretending to look like a group is called "civilized manner" Since when passive-agressive-sissy-sensitive attitude is called "civilized manner" ?

[Free]

MrAce, on 2011-July-18, 02:52, said:

And who the heck is "We" ? One Lurpoa is enough for each planet in the universe. I am hoping you referred your ♥ symbols by saying "WE"

I believe "we" means all Lurpoas from the multiverse.

[Lurpoa]

MrAce, on 2011-July-18, 02:52, said:

You obviously have no idea how it sounds like when i am unpolite, i thought i was as polite as i could be. By the way i am assuming you meant "in a civilized manner". Downvote by you would be my honor, i would screen shot that downvote, print out and hang on my wall proudly. What could terorize me would be an UPVOTE by you.

And who the heck is "We" ? One Lurpoa is enough for each planet in the universe. I am hoping you referred to your ♥ symbols or to your other accounts when said "WE"

And since when downvoting and upvoting people for no particular reason is called "civilized manner" ? Since when changing names and pretending to look like a group is called "civilized manner" Since when passive-agressive-sissy-sensitive attitude is called "civilized manner" ?

♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥


Oh, shocking, your language....
Really un-acceptable...

We hope somebody does something about that......

From my part, I forgive you, but please, do not forget that many people read this.....

[han]

Action failed: you have reached your quota of hearts for the day.

[xxhong]

Well, speaking rudely only makes you sound even weaker. If you like a takeout double over 1D with those hands, bid as what you like. There was a typo in my original post, "bidding 2S" instead of "bidding 2H".
It is people like you who make bridge becomes less and less popular.

MrAce, on 2011-July-18, 00:53, said:

It is ok to write nonsense, but if u think the more u repeat the less nonsense it will look, u are wrong. 2 people tried to explain you b4 me, u repeat the same thing on and on.

Here is why i call it a nonsense; You say with those hands (xxx Kxx x AKJTxx, xxx Kxxx x AKQTx, Kxxx xxx x AKQTx the overcaller should not DBL and that this is a style u like your opps to play not your pd (correct me if i am wrong pls) So you do not want overcaller to DBL with those hands, and u also do not want his pd to DBL with current hand Kxxxx Axxx majors because this DBL is spared for the hand Axx xx KQJTx xx to come which allows you to make a penalty DBL and be rich in one hand. Again, funny as it is, you speak of inconsistency, yet you seem to live in peace with your pd when opps play 2♦ with their 9 cards fit and when you side has 9 cards major fit close to 10 tricks It is ok though for you and your pd, you will make that penalty DBL when it comes while everyone else will have to pass. Of course just like most of the nonsense i read in the past, you dont fail to call it "STYLE"

And here comes the EXTREME nonsense



Dammit boy! Bidding our 4 card ♥ suit...over the negative DBL...when we have 5♠ !!! You really want to DBL those opponents, dont you ? I never saw anyone b4 who is so imaginative in order to keep his penalty DBL !

Good luck with your STYLE !

[MrAce]

xxhong, on 2011-July-18, 11:26, said:

Well, speaking rudely only makes you sound even weaker. If you like a takeout double over 1D with those hands, bid as what you like.

Don't even try to duck the point i made. I am not saying he MUST dbl 1♦. I am showing how inconsistent it is to play DBL by responder as penalty when one doesn't allow his pd to start DBL over 1♦ or DBL 2♦ when he initially overcalled 2♣ with the hands u gave as example facing the OP hand.

[Phil]

MrAce, on 2011-July-18, 02:52, said:

One Lurpoa is enough for each planet in the universe.

Disagree.