[gnasher]

Phil, on 2011-February-03, 09:00, said:

Had a thread about this last year and a mixed raise simply shows a hand in the range between a limit and a preemptive raise.

That doesn't get us very far unless we also have agreement about what constitutes a preemptive raise.

[manudude03]

gnasher, on 2011-February-04, 16:59, said:

Did Whereagles edit his original post after you said this?

It was Phil who posted the hands with AKJx and Kxxx, whereeagles merely said that they should be treated the same.

[gnasher]

gnasher, on 2011-February-04, 16:59, said:

I can't see anything in what he said that suggests he thinks these two holdings are equivalent.

I'd better reply to that before someone else does. I suppose that if two hands have the same playing strength and the same offensive-defensive ratio, they also have the same defensive strength. AKJx in partner's suit is probaby worth one more defensive trick than Kxxx, so if that's what Han and MtVesuvius meant they're right.

I don't think, however, that a one-trick range in defensive strength is too wide. I'd be more concerned about the difference in offensive strength.

[whereagles]

I didn't. He just cherry-picked the part he wanted to comment - very common in politics eheh

[the hog]

If you don't play mixed raises, don't you think you are a little weak for a limit raise? Personally I agree with Nuno and don't think the 3S bid is that bad.
As to passing or bidding on, this is now an obvious pass - I am not going to double cross my partner.

[Phil]

gnasher, on 2011-February-04, 17:03, said:

That doesn't get us very far unless we also have agreement about what constitutes a preemptive raise.

At w/w I would expect either 5 card support and 5332/5422, or 4 card support (but never 4333), a trump honor and or s/v. Hands with bad ODR I would downgrade to a simple raise. The upper limit would be a hand that I would make a simple raise in the auction 1M - 2M but with one trump less.

[han]

gnasher, on 2011-February-04, 16:59, said:

Did Whereagles edit his original post after you said this? I can't see anything in what he said that suggests he thinks these two holdings are equivalent.

Not only do I not think that the holdings are equivalent, I think the holdings are not similar, which is what I wrote. To me the words similar and equivalent are quite different. If you consider the two words identical (or equivalent, or even similar), then it is no wonder you did not understand which statement of wereagles I was disagreeing with.

[cherdano]

gnasher, on 2011-February-04, 16:59, said:

Did Whereagles edit his original post after you said this? I can't see anything in what he said that suggests he thinks these two holdings are equivalent.

Is your point that Han should have been more precise? He should have mocked whereagles for saying that AKJx xx xx J9xxx and Kxxx x xxxx xxxx have about the same playing strength and the same ODR?

[han]

I never mock.

[whereagles]

The full hand:

---

I was really surprised to see people disagreeing with 3♠, which I thought was a pretty normal bid. Still, what should we do here? Trust our high ODR and bid 4♠ or let it ride due to the lack of singleton?

It's a bit of a guess and, as you can see, passing is the right option, albeit again a lucky one because pard has a natural club lead to receive two ruffs and set this 2 tricks. On another lead or setup, 4♥ is likely to make and the save rates to be good. As it is, 4♠ now (or before, lol) will, in this context, see opps doubling you for -100.

[TylerE]

3♠ is preemptive. At least where I'm from, you don't make a preemptive raise with 2 outside quick tricks.

[655321]

whereagles, on 2011-February-08, 18:15, said:

It's a bit of a guess

How is it a guess? If this is a normal 3♠ bid in your methods (I agree with everyone else that 3♠ was bad) then you have an automatic pass. If 3♠ was the wrong bid then the question is not interesting.

[whereagles]

It's a guess now as it was the round before whether or not to bid 4♠

[Phil]

4♥ is not a good contract single-dummy and on these 'other layouts' you reference, 4♠ is 300 anyway.

[manudude03]

I think you have the auction wrong in the full hand

[whereagles]

oops. right. I messed it up

[han]

edited

[gwnn]

whereagles, on 2011-February-09, 02:18, said:

It's a guess now as it was the round before whether or not to bid 4♠

No it's not, partner also knows about the intricacies of saving at bridge, and he has (supposedly) a much better idea of what we have than we about his. So if this is a 3♠ bid, then we have to trust partner. I don't see why you think this is still a guess. Partner had the guess and he made it.