Help
If this is 5cM, why not 2NT over 1H?
If 4cM 2/1, I guess the meaning of 3H is important. PFA applies so this is showing more than a minimum GF, but I don't see any reason why you can't just go 4H with the first hand and make some sort of cue bid / slam try with the second. Of course, fancy tools like serious 3NT and LTTC aren't bad ideas either, but I'm not sure they're essential.
ahydra
System challange
#21
- AQT92 AQ --- QJ6532
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 2,840
- Joined: 2009-September-09
- Gender:Male
- Location:Wellington, NZ
Posted 2012-March-30, 11:01
#22
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 4,942
- Joined: 2005-January-28
- Gender:Male
- Location:Cologne, Germany
- Interests:Sleeping, Eating
Posted 2012-March-30, 11:07
ahydra, on 2012-March-30, 11:01, said:
If this is 5cM, why not 2NT over 1H?
Do I really have to mention that the majority play 2NT as showing a 4-card raise in the Expert-Class Bridge forum? I would expect a much more detailed explanation of why you think (a) it shouldn't show a 4-card raise in general or (b) it should show a 4-card raise but it's good to lie to partner on this particular hand.
"One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid, and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision"
-- Bertrand Russell
-- Bertrand Russell
#23
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 2,555
- Joined: 2007-January-22
Posted 2012-March-30, 13:50
Quote
If this is 5cM, why not 2NT over 1H?
Where I live people think that 2N as forcing raise isn't very good use for the bid.
Before you criticize this style take into account that many elite pairs playing 5cM are of similar opinion.
You can see that we are much better off afte 2C here. We could have belong in clubs if partner was 1-5-3-4 we could have belong in 3NT if he was 3-5-4-1. We have learnt about the shape and now the question is how to find our range.
Quote
. I play that 3H by responder is non-serious
I like this. Seems natural according to principle: old suit = weakness, new information/suit = strength
Quote
I understand that some would interpret 4C as showing a real club suit, but is that best? Opener has already said a lot about his shape, it seems to me (and I learned this from you) that from now on we should just cuebid.
We may want to play in clubs I guess, we have shorter fragment and shortness there could be just more tricks in clubs than in hearts (for example if we have 5 top clubs, 4 hearts (without A), Aof spades and A of diamonds we have 12 tricks in clubs and 11 tricks in hearts).
Quote
1H 2C
2D 2H
3C 3D
4D(serious cue) 4N(RKC) ...
2D 2H
3C 3D
4D(serious cue) 4N(RKC) ...
Well, responder is in 12-21 (or at least in 12-17) here, I am not sure if nice 13 qualifies as serious try.
Quote
A lalldonn innovation
I like the idea. I would prefer to play:
1H - 2C
2D - 2H
2S = any minimum though (and then maybe serious/non serious along the way after learning about shape) because it allows us to just bid game after weak response without inquiring about shape and giving free info. Unfortunately the hand was played in pick-up partnership and we didn't have much of a system for the occasion.
#24
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 328
- Joined: 2010-November-11
Posted 2012-March-30, 16:49
I think it is a good 13 plus a singleton with 6 losers. If you don't shown any signs of life here, partner may have a difficult time to decide whether to push more with marginal hands that makes a slam. The line I draw here is 15 points (high card points and distribution) to show the serious or non-serious hands (Or 6 losers). Perhaps it is lighter than many others, but not lighter too much.
bluecalm, on 2012-March-30, 13:50, said:
Where I live people think that 2N as forcing raise isn't very good use for the bid.
Before you criticize this style take into account that many elite pairs playing 5cM are of similar opinion.
You can see that we are much better off afte 2C here. We could have belong in clubs if partner was 1-5-3-4 we could have belong in 3NT if he was 3-5-4-1. We have learnt about the shape and now the question is how to find our range.
I like this. Seems natural according to principle: old suit = weakness, new information/suit = strength
We may want to play in clubs I guess, we have shorter fragment and shortness there could be just more tricks in clubs than in hearts (for example if we have 5 top clubs, 4 hearts (without A), Aof spades and A of diamonds we have 12 tricks in clubs and 11 tricks in hearts).
Well, responder is in 12-21 (or at least in 12-17) here, I am not sure if nice 13 qualifies as serious try.
I like the idea. I would prefer to play:
1H - 2C
2D - 2H
2S = any minimum though (and then maybe serious/non serious along the way after learning about shape) because it allows us to just bid game after weak response without inquiring about shape and giving free info. Unfortunately the hand was played in pick-up partnership and we didn't have much of a system for the occasion.
Before you criticize this style take into account that many elite pairs playing 5cM are of similar opinion.
You can see that we are much better off afte 2C here. We could have belong in clubs if partner was 1-5-3-4 we could have belong in 3NT if he was 3-5-4-1. We have learnt about the shape and now the question is how to find our range.
I like this. Seems natural according to principle: old suit = weakness, new information/suit = strength
We may want to play in clubs I guess, we have shorter fragment and shortness there could be just more tricks in clubs than in hearts (for example if we have 5 top clubs, 4 hearts (without A), Aof spades and A of diamonds we have 12 tricks in clubs and 11 tricks in hearts).
Well, responder is in 12-21 (or at least in 12-17) here, I am not sure if nice 13 qualifies as serious try.
I like the idea. I would prefer to play:
1H - 2C
2D - 2H
2S = any minimum though (and then maybe serious/non serious along the way after learning about shape) because it allows us to just bid game after weak response without inquiring about shape and giving free info. Unfortunately the hand was played in pick-up partnership and we didn't have much of a system for the occasion.