[inquiry]

mike777, on Mar 21 2005, 06:19 PM, said:

This sequence is quite a bit more old school than what Ben and others suggest:

P=1D=X=P
1S=2D=P=P
2S=3D=3S=P

1S=0-8(MINUS)
2S=SUGGESTS EXTRA LENGTH OR PLAYING STRENGTH GIVEN 1S BID.
3S=9 CARD SUGGESTED FIT, NO WASTED D, GOOD HEARTS

Also "fought the law" suggests 9 tricks:
13-4-0=9

After 1♠, I will not raise to 2♠. The reaosn being, partner can be a whole lot worse than he is. He might not even have 4 spades (although with the diamond rebid, this is much less likely).

I think the auction should be (assuming a 1♠ response)

1♦-DBL-PASS-1♠
2♦-Pss-Pass- 2♠

now the initial doubler might try 3♠

[HeartA]

inquiry, on Mar 21 2005, 06:54 PM, said:

mike777, on Mar 21 2005, 06:19 PM, said:

This sequence is quite a bit more old school than what Ben and others suggest:

P=1D=X=P
1S=2D=P=P
2S=3D=3S=P

1S=0-8(MINUS)
2S=SUGGESTS EXTRA LENGTH OR PLAYING STRENGTH GIVEN 1S BID.
3S=9 CARD SUGGESTED FIT, NO WASTED D, GOOD HEARTS

Also "fought the law" suggests 9 tricks:
13-4-0=9

After 1♠, I will not raise to 2♠. The reaosn being, partner can be a whole lot worse than he is. He might not even have 4 spades (although with the diamond rebid, this is much less likely).

I think the auction should be (assuming a 1♠ response)

1♦-DBL-PASS-1♠
2♦-Pss-Pass- 2♠

now the initial doubler might try 3♠

That is what I was writing, but got lost when I hit "Add Reply". Did you steal my post, Ben?

There was something more lost in my post. There is no way for you to get perfect score at cometition. Opps deserved good score when (s)he was brave enough to bd 3D. (s)he risked being got doubled and bottom (not likely, given the favorite vulnerability though). Yes, if North switch one H to C, the bidding would be the same. After all, South could have AKJx, xxx, xx, KQJx for the dbl (maybe overcall 1S, or pass?). If you didn't want the risk of getting -200, you should be content with +50 (and bottom )

[mike777]

inquiry, on Mar 21 2005, 06:54 PM, said:

mike777, on Mar 21 2005, 06:19 PM, said:

This sequence is quite a bit more old school than what Ben and others suggest:

P=1D=X=P
1S=2D=P=P
2S=3D=3S=P

1S=0-8(MINUS)
2S=SUGGESTS EXTRA LENGTH OR PLAYING STRENGTH GIVEN 1S BID.
3S=9 CARD SUGGESTED FIT, NO WASTED D, GOOD HEARTS

Also "fought the law" suggests 9 tricks:
13-4-0=9

After 1♠, I will not raise to 2♠. The reaosn being, partner can be a whole lot worse than he is. He might not even have 4 spades (although with the diamond rebid, this is much less likely).

I think the auction should be (assuming a 1♠ response)

1♦-DBL-PASS-1♠
2♦-Pss-Pass- 2♠

now the initial doubler might try 3♠

??

Lost me.

So you agree with 1s initial bid and meaning of 2s rebid after initial 1s bid and the raise of 3s by south after passing on previous rounds as I have explained here, yes?

[HeartA]

Either 1S or 2S is OK. South was not strong enough to raise directly (or after opp's 2D), but could compete later.

[inquiry]

mike777, on Mar 21 2005, 08:52 PM, said:

inquiry, on Mar 21 2005, 06:54 PM, said:

mike777, on Mar 21 2005, 06:19 PM, said:

This sequence is quite a bit more old school than what Ben and others suggest:

P=1D=X=P
1S=2D=P=P
2S=3D=3S=P

1S=0-8(MINUS)
2S=SUGGESTS EXTRA LENGTH OR PLAYING STRENGTH GIVEN 1S BID.
3S=9 CARD SUGGESTED FIT, NO WASTED D, GOOD HEARTS

Also "fought the law" suggests 9 tricks:
13-4-0=9

After 1♠, I will not raise to 2♠. The reaosn being, partner can be a whole lot worse than he is. He might not even have 4 spades (although with the diamond rebid, this is much less likely).

I think the auction should be (assuming a 1♠ response)

1♦-DBL-PASS-1♠
2♦-Pss-Pass- 2♠

now the initial doubler might try 3♠

??

Lost me.

So you agree with 1s initial bid and meaning of 2s rebid after initial 1s bid and the raise of 3s by south after passing on previous rounds as I have explained here, yes?

whoops.. i misread your reply.. of course, if the bid is 1S, pass by doubler is right (as you showed)... my bad. so we agree on that.

Ben

[Fluffy]

Chamaco, on Mar 21 2005, 03:42 PM, said:

Thanks to comments so far.

However, I am still puzzled.
I mean, would you bid 3S with North also with the following ?

Hand 1
♠ QTxxx
♥ xx
♦ AJx
♣ xxx

Instead of the actual hand:
Hand 2
♠ QTxxx
♥ xxx
♦ AJx
♣ xx

I have only switched 1 heart with 1 club, yet here 3S is down 1 (200 if doubled)

♥ and ♣ are both uunbid suits, therefore ther is no difference in betweem them at all, partner has the same average holdng on them.

[Fluffy]

mike777, on Mar 21 2005, 03:54 PM, said:

Fluffy, on Mar 21 2005, 10:13 AM, said:

1♠ = 0-7
2♠= 8-11 4♠ cards
3♠= 8-11 5♠ cards

If you play that style you can end up in 3s with 5 across from 3 and 8hcp across from 12hcp then. I assume you want to be able to x with 3424 or 3415 shape.

I would alse double with 3325 and 11 HCP

Yes I could end up there, and I could make an overtrick.

Also I could open 1♣ with 4423 and 13 HCP and get doubled for -2300 vulnerable vs not, but I will still open 1♣.

[Chamaco]

mike777, on Mar 21 2005, 06:04 PM, said:

ok, but after a Take out x have no idea why this will be more important to show than other type hands.

Well my idea is that constructive tools are very useful ESPECIALLY when responding to a takeout double because:

1- in modern bidding, opponents will often bid a lot with nothing- ESPECIALLY OVER A TO DOUBLE! - and we need to be able to bid close games even when opps get busy; even if responder passes, it is good practice to anticipate competition by a bid that delivers the most info;

2- if the doubler can have right away from advancer the info that game is not on (and this is usually delivered by a bid which is weaker than invitational, but also weaker than 9 losers) then we can quickly switch from "constructive" mode to "competitive/preemptive" mode, and jumpraise the auction to the appropriate level.

Anyways, I just want to keep well-separated invitational hands from weaker hands.
So, 8 losers hand shoul have a different bid from weaker hands, that's all :-)

If then anyone can come up with a tool to further separate 9 losers hand specifically from even weaker hands, while still keeping the stronger hand well-defined, even better !

[Free]

1♠ is just fine. But after the support from partner, North should bid 3♠ because he knows about the extra length.

[Chamaco]

inquiry, on Mar 21 2005, 05:55 PM, said:

"mixed raise

Ok, here I assume you mean the 8/9 loser hand. If it has a five card major, I jump to two of the major. This is always 10 points or less.

Limit raise

....

Ben, I had thought of such scheme.

Bit how do you handle sequences 1S-X-p ?

In this case, there is no jump available to the 2-level, and with H you can only jump at the 3 level.

I actually had toyed with the idea of transfer advances to t/o doubles, allowing for more discrimination, and I am sure there must be already something out there.
If anyone has any refs, please post them at:

http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?sho...view=getnewpost

that could save me some search time :-)

[mr1303]

In one partnership we play that X = good take out (15+) and 1NT = bad take-out, so we can play mini-Lebensohl (with 4333 and a 7 count we can pass and beat them on power.

[Chamaco]

mr1303, on Mar 22 2005, 12:05 PM, said:

In one partnership we play that X = good take out (15+) and 1NT = bad take-out, so we can play mini-Lebensohl (with 4333 and a 7 count we can pass and beat them on power.

I use 1NT as Raptor.

[Brandal]

Chamaco, on Mar 21 2005, 09:41 AM, said:

who do you think should have bid 3 ?

In my opinion,North should

[P_Marlowe]

Chamaco, on Mar 21 2005, 12:46 PM, said:

P_Marlowe, on Mar 21 2005, 05:29 PM, said:

You could add a version of Good-Bad 2 NT (*)

We do play 2NT lebensohl by advancer (responder to t/o dbl).

But using artificial 2NT by the doubler is tricky:

Issue 1
we play Raptor, so X +NT might be neded for the strong balanced hand ?
Or do u suggest to use Dbl (after opener's rebid) as generic strong hand including the strong balanced and 2NT as artificial?

Issue 2

even using 2NT by opener as artificial commits to the 3 level opposite a pard who could hold a yarborough.
This is dangerous at red vs white.

Hi,

using an artificial 2 NT by the doubler would only aply
in the situation, that opener rebids his suit.

Now you do not need 2 NT as natural, at least not
for hands in the 15-17 HCP range.
Because if partner is broke, you do not want to play
2 NT, so you could use 2 NT as Lebensohl style.

A double should probably be "optional" , prepared to
play the 4-3 fit on the two level, but also looking for a
penalty, so yes the strong balanced hands would use
double.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Rebound]

It seems pretty straight forward to me. If you do not consider the north hand to be worth a 2♠ bid directly over the double (I do), then surely with a max for the 1♠ bid you must compete to 3♠ if only to tell partner about the extra strength.