On May 2, 1:43=A0pm, Adam Beneschan <a...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On May 2, 8:16 am, henrysun...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 2, 5:25 am, wolfgang.schmitt-schroe...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>
> > N: 98x AKB4 ADB 98x
> > S: AB7x Txx T9xx Dx
>
> > the bidding:
> > 1H =A0 1S =A01NT =A02C
> > p(*) =A0p =A0 =A0double =A0... =A0 all pass
>
> > 1NT should have 8-10hcp, with shortness we play frequent 3-card-M-
> > raises
> > (*) double would be Take-Out
>
> > ***********
>
> > Hopefuly, here are the hands in "english" translation:
>
> Responder's clubs are Qx. =A0I've corrected the diagram.
>
>
>
>
>
> > 98x
> > AKJx
> > AQJ
> > 98x
>
> > AJ7x
> > Txx
> > T9xx
> > Qx =A0[corrected]
>
> > Here are my views.
>
> > First, the 1h and 1nt bids are fine. =A0The 1nt bid may be a small
> > stretch, but the AJxx of spades is worth more now that spades have
> > been bid behind them, plus the ten of hearts is worth a little
> > something, and there is value in a competitive auction to bidding 1nt
> > before the enemy. =A01nt is a stretch, but I don't criticize it too
> > severely.
>
> It's even less of a stretch than you thought.
>
> I suppose someone could argue that opener could have opened 1NT,
> downgrading for flat distribution. =A0But the heart suit argues for a 1H
> opening.
>
> > Playing the the double of 2c by opener is takeout is, however, silly.
> > Takeout for what? =A0I suppose that on the auction 1h (1S) 1nt (2d);
?,
> > having a double to be 'takeout for clubs" makes some sense, because
> > responder can give preference to hearts on the 2-level and opener can
> > compete more freely by doubling to show clubs (and then 3c could be
> > used to show a different hand then the double), and I suppose on the
> > 'let's not have two different methods for two mostly similar auctions'
> > principle one might decide to double this 2c bid for takeout, but I
> > still don't like it.
>
> I don't know Acol, but it would seem like if you play a weak notrump
> and don't have a way to show a strong notrump on this auction, there's
> a problem with the system, no?
People playing strong notrump don't have "a way to show weak notrump"
on many auctions. Inference gets you where you need to go fairly often
in both cases.
>
> I'm not sure why responder decided to double instead of showing
> delayed heart sup****t---that should be acceptable with just three
> since responder already failed to raise the first round, right?
The delayed raise looks right to me. On the other hand, I don't mind
at all defending 2CX on these hands. Lead trumps at every op****tunity
and see what happens. It may well have made it _this_ time but
defending 2CX on these cards looks like a long-term winner. They are
vulnerable. We don't have a game. They are rarely going to make any
overtricks. We are often getting it more than one. If they make it it
isn't a game.
--
Will in New Haven
|
