[sfi]

Kaitlyn S, on 2017-June-18, 18:50, said:

I thought you were new but now I think you're just trolling. If you can convince me that you're not trolling, I'll respond to your posts.

That was my thinking as well. S/he finds an impressive number of straw man arguments to fight against in my two-line response, while missing the main point entirely.

Given that none of them has anything to do with the original problems, I'm done.

[Nabooba]

Trolling? That conclusion is up to you. I am pointing out that your arguments and bidding are badly flawed. While your intentions are good, you should think through what you post here.

[Kaitlyn S]

Nabooba, on 2017-June-18, 19:27, said:

Trolling? That conclusion is up to you. I am pointing out that your arguments and bidding are badly flawed. While your intentions are good, you should think through what you post here.

Well, we're both going to get a shock. So far, on BridgeWinners, 2H (on QTxxxx) is ahead of Pass 6 to 4.

I'm shocked that 2H isn't almost unanimous. If you're not trolling (and I have to give you the benefit of the doubt simply because there are bridge players voting to pass 2C), you're probably shocked that 2H is getting any votes at all.

[Nabooba]

"you're probably shocked that 2H is getting any votes at all."
Not really. Like most fora, the posters are a mixed bag. There are only a few experts who post. Of those who opted for 2h only J. Donn surprises me as he is mostly sound. I guess we all have our off days.

[Kaitlyn S]

Nabooba, on 2017-June-19, 06:56, said:

"you're probably shocked that 2H is getting any votes at all."
Not really. Like most fora, the posters are a mixed bag. There are only a few experts who post. Of those who opted for 2h only J. Donn surprises me as he is mostly sound. I guess we all have our off days.

When I went to bed, 2H was ahead 11-6. Now it's 28-7, so while I was sleeping, 2H got 17 votes (presumably from the experts coming home from their tournaments) and pass got 1.

I asked Paul to post the case for 2H (which apparently got posted after most of these votes were in.) He added his own comment at the end (the traitor )

The case for 2H: The expected trump length in 2C is about 6.4 and the expected trump length in 2H is almost 8. Also, pass is final; 2H is not final since if partner really prefers clubs, he can go back to 3C, or perhaps bid 2S showing 3-0-4-6.

One upside for pass is that it's a lot harder to double 2C when repsonder can be unlimited than it is to double 2H when both partners are limited.

[Kaitlyn S]

Nabooba, on 2017-June-18, 18:37, said:

Opposite my posted hand with a weakish 3 5 5 0 or similar responder may well pass 1S, as many here, (not me I hasten to add as I play this sequence as forcing), play it as nf. Do you like your trump fit?

Almost every bid, regardless of how sensible it is, can be shown to get a bad result with the proper construction. For example if partner opens 1NT (15-17) and you have Jxx, xx, AJxx, KQxx, you would bid 3NT, I would bid 3NT, everybody would bid 3NT (assuming Puppet Stayman isn't being used or isn't chosen.)

However, give the opener AKQx, Ax, Qxx, JTxx and it's pretty clear that 3NT is not a great contract, but 4S is. So someone could advocate for using Stayman on my responding hand citing this construction as evidence. They would be wrong, of course, and it feels like what you are doing here.

You may or may not have a valid point, but when your examples are the worst possible layout for a particular bid, and can be easily pointed out to be exactly that, you tend to lose credibility. You have to show that your suggested action works out better on more normal layouts.

In Problem 6, I survived the 2H bid that you call dreadful despite partner having one of the worst holdings - a void and a hand not suited to an obvious run back to 3C. However, partner saved me by assuming I would know exactly what she meant because IMO it's the only thing she could mean with her 2S bid, and we got to the top partscore in diamonds on a layout in which the Bulletin stated that nobody could get to diamonds on such a sadistic setup.

Of course that is quite a construction, I admit, but I get to add that to all the times that opener has two or three hearts, which is a lot of the time, I also get to add in time times that partner is 3-1-4-5 and had to rebid a weakish club suit (of course I have the advantage of knowing my partner isn't rebidding 1NT on this hand, nor is she opening 1D. The odds change slightly if your partner might do either of those.) 2H might be better on those occasions where partner has six weakish clubs and a singleton heart honor. And, of course, the 2H bid breaks even when partner has an awful dummy for 2H but knows that 3C rates to play better, and can actually take 9 tricks. Note that my weak heart suit is a bonus in these situations; normally going to 3C will be a disaster when the strong hearts are stranded, but instead I am offering partner a ♠A and a ♦J10, which is a lot more than she can expect.

[Zelandakh]

Kaitlyn S, on 2017-June-18, 18:50, said:

I thought you were new but now I think you're just trolling.

I don't think Nabooba is a troll, just overly opinionated as is typical of many inexperienced posters here. The real issue is that her knowledge is obviously way out of date and of a much lower level than she believes, which leads to some stuff getting posted that everyone at BBF knows is stupid but she thinks is correct. Give her some time to adapt and learn - that is after all pretty much what the N/B forum is designed for.

[Kaitlyn S]

Zelandakh, on 2017-June-20, 07:42, said:

I don't think Nabooba is a troll, just overly opinionated as is typical of many inexperienced posters here. The real issue is that her knowledge is obviously way out of date and of a much lower level than she believes, which leads to some stuff getting posted that everyone at BBF knows is stupid but she thinks is correct. Give her some time to adapt and learn - that is after all pretty much what the N/B forum is designed for.

Apparently this problem draws that feature out. Although 2H is winning 40-7 on Bridge Winners right now, two of the three comments (not counting the one I sent a friend to be posted) are vehemently against 2H.

Someone stated that 2H (in 1C P 1H P 2C P 2H) should be constructive. I believe that opinion was widely held several decades ago. There is some small merit in playing it that way but that's not standard.

[diana_eva]

Kaitlyn S, on 2017-June-18, 18:50, said:

I thought you were new but now I think you're just trolling.

He is trolling. Don't let this stuff get to you, Kaitlyn, your series for I/N/A players are very helpful.

[sfi]

Kaitlyn S, on 2017-June-20, 09:20, said:

Apparently this problem draws that feature out. Although 2H is winning 40-7 on Bridge Winners right now, two of the three comments (not counting the one I sent a friend to be posted) are vehemently against 2H.

Really the comments are only 1-1. The same person made their point against 2H twice.