For me, this is a most interesting discussion. I appreciate your advice.
I have been thinking ! Marty Bergen defines negative doubles this way;
"A negative double is used by responder after his partner's opening bid
has been
overcalled. It shows at least a minimum response, but denies the length
or
strength needed in order for responder to bid a suit of his own."
So my partner's bid WAS a negative double. His double was an SAYC bid.
It
required no alert and no explanation. And as declarer of a partner who
was a
passed hand, I had every right to treat it in any way I liked including
passing
to simply take my chances. I did NOT "convert" it. Were the opponents
justified in seeking an explanation for such an ordinary bid ? Was the TD
justified in penalizing my very ordinary, "pass". ?
Interesting or just plain wrong ?
(There is no doubt that Michaels is part of sayc... but that was the
opponent's
bid. My bid was a cue bid of a cue bid (Unusual over Michaels) I
understand
you to say that as a cue bid it is non-alertable, but if asked by opps I
would
be obliged to say "limit raise or better".. Is this right ?)
wchen
Barry Margolin wrote:
> In article <3FF88B3B.54CC1F11@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
> william henderson <wchen@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > What about cue-bids ? Is it true that cue bids are not alertable ?
This
> > afternoon,
> > my partner opened 1 club and my RHO bid 2 clubs (michaels). I
immediately
> > bid 2
> > hearts even thouigh we had no arrangement of unusual/michaels, but
surely
> > obviously
> > a cue-bid. Must I alert this cue bid ? Must I tell them my meaning
even
> > when we
> > have no arrangement ?
>
> Maybe you should take a few minutes and read the SAYC booklet (it's in
> the OKBridge help) so you'll know what your agreements are. Michaels
> cue-bids and Unusual 2NT are part of SAYC, so you *did* have an
> agreement about this.
>
> The rule in OKB tourneys is that you don't have to alert anything that's
> in SAYC. Also, since self-alerts aren't seen by your partner, the rule
> of thumb on OKB is that if you're not sure, it's always safe to alert.
>
> But regardless of whether you have to alert something, you *always* have
> to explain it if asked.
>
> P.S. Again, the word is "agreement", not "arrangement".
>
> --
> Barry Margolin, barmar@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Arlington, MA
|
