[Free]

Vampyr, on 2011-May-31, 05:49, said:

MrAce, on 2011-May-30, 16:12, said:

Or you can choose to pattern your hand with reverse and then 3rd suit, and god knows where you will stop that rig.

This would be an unusual auction, since the only suit available to reverse into is clubs.

Bidding any number of ♣ is never a reverse according to the definition of a reverse. After 1♦-1NT you have 2 reverses: 2♥ and 2♠. MrAce only means to pattern out by bidding 1♦ followed by 2♥ followed by 3♠, or 1♦ followed by 2♠ followed by 3♥.

[Phil]

jmcw, on 2011-May-30, 10:07, said:

BTW doesn't 1♦>>1M>>4M deny a stiff, usually 18/19 balanced?

Great comment.

1m - 1M - 4M showed a big balanced hand at one time, but many have shifted to 1x - 1M - 4M to be a distributional hand that just wants to bid game. This leaves 1m - 1M - (splinter) and 1m - 1M - 4m to be really good hands instead of some 14 point 6430.

18-19 point balanced hands are handled by 3M, but if you have a really good balanced GF, like a 4522 some like to play 3M minus 1, so 1♣ - 1♥ - 3♦ can be this hand type.

[Vampyr]

Free, on 2011-May-31, 06:57, said:

Bidding any number of ♣ is never a reverse according to the definition of a reverse.

Of course, but...

Quote

After 1♦-1NT you have 2 reverses: 2♥ and 2♠. MrAce only means to pattern out by bidding 1♦ followed by 2♥ followed by 3♠, or 1♦ followed by 2♠ followed by 3♥.

A reverse (not by definition, but as it's understood and played) must be into a shorter suit than the one originally opened. My point was that there are no reverses that can be made with this hand.

[hrothgar]

Free, on 2011-May-31, 06:57, said:

Bidding any number of ♣ is never a reverse according to the definition of a reverse. After 1♦-1NT you have 2 reverses: 2♥ and 2♠.

In the weird old days, a 3♣ rebid would sometimes be called a "high reverse"

[tolvyrj]

They call me stone-age George i know, but i still play it like that. Jump in the lower ranking suit is reverse in my books .

[MrAce]

tolvyrj, on 2011-May-31, 12:18, said:

They call me stone-age George i know, but i still play it like that. Jump in the lower ranking suit is reverse in my books .

Doesn't matter if stone age or millenium age you prefer to play, as long as you try to duck the question you were asked and try to patch it with counter questions we can't understand each other.

Again, when u open 1♦ and pd responds 1NT with ♣s and 5-7 hcps, how are you planning to stop this rig ? Which would obviously be a problem as u already stated for 2NT openers but i wanna hear your magic cure after 1♦ please if you don't mind.

[tolvyrj]

No i dont mind. I dont know what magical i can show though .

1 ♦- 1Nt
3Nt
In my system prd cant have 4 card major and his upper limit in hcp. is 10. I cant see the problem, sry.
If i open with off shape and streched 2Nt i can visualize several problems when prd has 8-9 hcp. and 5 or cards in club suit. Staying below slam seems quite hard.
Both hand types balanced and three suiters have the same problem, they lack the source of tricks in form of a long suit and they contain plenty of losers course there r many small cards in the hand. I dont believe that bending the system in no-trump openings is winnig policy in the long run.

[MrAce]

tolvyrj, on 2011-May-31, 15:54, said:

No i dont mind. I dont know what magical i can show though .

1 ♦- 1Nt
3Nt
In my system prd cant have 4 card major and his upper limit in hcp. is 10. I cant see the problem, sry.
If i open with off shape and streched 2Nt i can visualize several problems when prd has 8-9 hcp. and 5 or cards in club suit. Staying below slam seems quite hard.
Both hand types balanced and three suiters have the same problem, they lack the source of tricks in form of a long suit and they contain plenty of losers course there r many small cards in the hand. I dont believe that bending the system in no-trump openings is winnig policy in the long run.

-I am not the one who stated that there will be problems when pd holds ♣, YOU were You could not stay below game as in your auction when pd has only AQxxx ♣ and nothing else. Thats why i found it irrlevant to mention this problem, since we both end up in 3 NT.

-People, at least the sane ones dont go slam just because they have 8-9 hcps and 5 cards ♣ suit vs a 2 NT opener. I dont even understand why u think it will be "quite hard" to not stay below slam.

-Yes 4441 3 suiters are lack of trick sources, and the ones that has stiff A or K or Q, are close to NT hands more than 3 suiter which could also be 5440 or 5530. Yes unfortunately when u open 2 NT with a stiff honor u usually have an A or K instead of xx, i am not sure about your pd but mine likes stiff honor more than xx . You also get to play the hand from strong hand as well as your stiff honor plays a deceptive role during the play when they are expecting you to have at least 2 cards in that suit. You may not like it, some do, there is nothing much to it to unless you think anything and everything that is different than the books you read is evil.

[Fluffy]

As for the opening style, with 15-17 HCP 4441 and a stiff King or Ace I think it is a big mistake not to open 1NT because it gives you rebid headaches, same goes for the very strong ranges (22+) where not treating the hand as balanced will endplay you in the bidding completelly.

The 18-21 range is perhaps the only one where you can flexibly open 1x and try to show your 3 suits. But I am not a fan of it anyway.

[tolvyrj]

Im glad we start to find understanding . Yes we will both end in 3Nt in this auction if prd has AQxxx in ♣. It dosent matter wheter u start with 1♦ or 2Nt.
And u quite right bout the next one too; 8-9 hcp. and 5 card ♣ suit is no reason to push into the slam against strong balanced hand. But what about 6 card suit and 10 hcp.,then it is easier as u prd "knows" that u have a 8 card trump suit.
And quite right, 4441 is closer to balanced hand than 5440 or 5530, which IMO is a 2-suiter. And yes stiff K or A is better than xx.
What comes to those books and things that r evil...eh, ok its not evil to bend system when u dont have choice, but here u do have a choice. Firstly this hand aint worth 20 hcp., stiff K. Ok if its to u open 2Nt with less than agreed then u r wlc to do so.
Secondly, 2 Nt is a "master" bid; u decide how this bidding sequence will proceed, with out giving u prd a chance to enter.
Im not talking just this case, but about bidding in generally. Yes my prd fancys stiff honours more than small doubletons, but what he likes especially is that i try not to lie him; at least not more than i time to time have to. Hes a smart guy and usually do not pass forcing bids and is able to find out what is my problem during the auction.
Bidding systems r build make things easier, they r like langugae u speak; but if u want to understood correctly u have use words in the right context. Little artistic freedom is always allowed, but in boundaries.
Other thing is partnership, the guy opposite the table trusts u and does his best to help u common cause. Its not good politics to try to decide everything by u self nor by mastering the bidding sequenses according to what u think is the best. Prd likes to be in when u try to bid best possible contract.
I would like to say previous is IMO, but u will find similar thoughts from, at least, some books too.

[MrAce]

tolvyrj, on 2011-May-31, 20:51, said:

Im glad we start to find understanding . Yes we will both end in 3Nt in this auction if prd has AQxxx in ♣. It dosent matter wheter u start with 1♦ or 2Nt.
And u quite right bout the next one too; 8-9 hcp. and 5 card ♣ suit is no reason to push into the slam against strong balanced hand. But what about 6 card suit and 10 hcp.,then it is easier as u prd "knows" that u have a 8 card trump suit.
And quite right, 4441 is closer to balanced hand than 5440 or 5530, which IMO is a 2-suiter. And yes stiff K or A is better than xx.
What comes to those books and things that r evil...eh, ok its not evil to bend system when u dont have choice, but here u do have a choice. Firstly this hand aint worth 20 hcp., stiff K. Ok if its to u open 2Nt with less than agreed then u r wlc to do so.
Secondly, 2 Nt is a "master" bid; u decide how this bidding sequence will proceed, with out giving u prd a chance to enter.
Im not talking just this case, but about bidding in generally. Yes my prd fancys stiff honours more than small doubletons, but what he likes especially is that i try not to lie him; at least not more than i time to time have to. Hes a smart guy and usually do not pass forcing bids and is able to find out what is my problem during the auction.
Bidding systems r build make things easier, they r like langugae u speak; but if u want to understood correctly u have use words in the right context. Little artistic freedom is always allowed, but in boundaries.
Other thing is partnership, the guy opposite the table trusts u and does his best to help u common cause. Its not good politics to try to decide everything by u self nor by mastering the bidding sequenses according to what u think is the best. Prd likes to be in when u try to bid best possible contract.
I would like to say previous is IMO, but u will find similar thoughts from, at least, some books too.

Unfortunately, things you are talking about, such as "pdship trust, boundaries,bidding systems...etc" are not as BLACK and WHITE as you see them or as the books show them. There are a lot of hands that remains in the gray area. 4441 with stiff honor is one of them.

I see it more of a balanced hand rather than an unbalanced hand. Although i appreciate everything books say, i can't just ignore my own experiences through the years such as, playing 3 NT and one of my opponents discarding from Txxx thinking i have Kx and he cant stop the suit anyway, or seeing my singleton K ducked even when the A is off side, seeing we made the game just because it was played from strong hand.

Ironic as it is, those who obsess a lot about this stiff honor vs xx, bids as if they have balanced hand after they decided this hand is NOT balanced and opened 1♦ Not only they lie about their shape, but also their range. Unless of course you totally throw the value of stiff honor to trash.

Your turn, cmon.

[tolvyrj]

And yes, u r again right that there r none of those things r black or whithe; but i must say i dont see them as grey as u do .
No i dont throw the whole value of stiff K into the bin, but dont count as 3 hcp. either, after which this hand is not 20 hcp. hand.
And in this i tend to be quite rigid, namely the point count .
If i open the bidding with 1 ♦ instead 2Nt how do i lie my shape or range? U mean 1♦- 1Nt- 3Nt case? What was wrong in that?
Deceptive values of singleton honours is not great here im afraid, opps tend to trust they prds and not my bidding . Have had few bitter lessons in that area .

[MrAce]

tolvyrj, on 2011-May-31, 21:50, said:

No i dont throw the whole value of stiff K into the bin, but dont count as 3 hcp. either, after which this hand is not 20 hcp. hand.

You say u dont count it 3 hcps, but you don't say what value you give to this stiff K. And i have a feeling you wont take my word for it so here you go;

Lets see how most respected hand evaluation methods value this stiff King.

QJ76
AK65
AK76
K

KNR = 19.60
ZAR points =37
Kleinman = Bad 20

Actually i wasn't expecting them giving ALMOST the whole value to the stiff K. KNR which is the most trusted among all others by expert community, valued this stiff King 2.60 hcp.

Now i changed the hand, to fullfit your request and supported the King with a small card.

QJ76
AK65
AK7
K2

And got these results

KNR = 19.70
ZAR =37
Kleinman = 20

As u can see, all the noise u make about the reduced strength due to stiff K, is not shared with ANY of the hand evaluation methods. Sorry

[Free]

This partnership thing is overrated when you hold a 4=4=4=1. Either you have a method to handle them in any case, or you don't. When you have a method, it's easy, you just start systemically and all ends well. If you don't have a method then you have to be creative, which is the case with many 4441-distributions for many pairs. So you either 'devaluate' your hand to the 12-19 HCP range, or you consider your ♣K worth a doubleton and open some number of NT. It's not like your partner should have ANY critisism about your deviation either way, since there's no clear answer if you don't have a method for these sort of hands.

[tolvyrj]

This seems to go in circle im afraid. So now it was u turn to open few books, okei whatever. You can do as u please of course, but i bet if u take this hand into some bidding contest u will get very few votes for 2 Nt( 20-22 bal.) opening bid. KNR and ZAR r methods to help hand evaluation, but the fact remains that the hand is balanced and u have a natural bid available here.
But if u want to open 2Nt with this hand, whom am i to tell u not to, these r just my opinions.
Free has a better point here IMO, why not downgrade this hand into 18-19 bal. category, eveything is so much easier after that. I just dont understand how u can overrate this " partnership thing", but maybe thats posiible too.
We use to have a system for these kind of hands. It was sort of rainbow multi, where there was 3 variants: weak 2 opening in one of the major, strong balanced 20-22 and exactly 4441 distribution 19-21 hcp. It was quite complicated and this 4441 variant quite rare so we skip it.

[MrAce]

tolvyrj, on 2011-June-01, 12:56, said:

This seems to go in circle im afraid. So now it was u turn to open few books, okei whatever. You can do as u please of course, but i bet if u take this hand into some bidding contest u will get very few votes for 2 Nt( 20-22 bal.) opening bid. KNR and ZAR r methods to help hand evaluation, but the fact remains that the hand is balanced and u have a natural bid available here.

No i am afraid you are abusing the rights to post something. Eachtime you tried to make a point and when your point was shown to not make sense you jumped to another one, just like this last post.

- You pointed 2 NT opening would be in trouble if pd has ♣, and u had to confess you didnt have a cure by opening 1♦ when pd has that

- You tried to point that this hand is unbalanced, but then had to admit that stiff K is not much different than xx.

- You then tried your luck in the STRENGTH of hand due to stiff honor, and i didnt open the books by the way, all evaluation methods are available to everyone online, which showed you were totally off with your evaluating the strength of this hand. And you are still off and need some basic math background if 19.60 or 37 zar or bad 20 hcp terms looks closer to 18-19 hcp than 20 hcp to you.

-Now you are trying to cover and patch all this with a "Bidding Contest" That was the funniest. Did u actually read what people replied in this topic ? Are you sure 1♦ will be overwhelmingly what everyone would choose ? Lets check;

Jillybean 1♦

manudude 1♦

the hog 2 nt

mrace 2 nt

han 2 nt or 1♦

aguahombre 1♦

Justin 2 nt

menggq 2NT or 1♦

mike777 2 nt

free 2 nt or 1 ♦

jmcw 2nt

yourself 1♦

2NT = 8

1♦ =7

Among those bidders, Justin is the one known to bid as natural as he can, if you read his posts and solutions when a bidding problem comes along.

None of us by the way suggested that 1♦ opening is wrong. It is you who is not happy with 2NT opening so i dont even get why you are showing me as if i have a problem with that. But if you have any other point to make that needs to be proven wrong just like the ones u already made, i will be more than happy to do so. Otherwise i will not reply if you keep on repeating yourself.

[tolvyrj]

Im sry if u are afraid bout me abusing the rights of posting something. And im also sry if i have hurt u some way; it was not my intention. What i mean bout this thing going circle was that i seem to be repeating my self.
But ok to the point once agin. Yes i did point out that i may run into some troubles if prd has long ♣ and i open with 2NT; promising 2 card ♣ suit. I NEVER said i would be in trouble if i open with 1 ♦ , promising 0+ cards in ♣. As a matter of fact if prd is able to bid 2 ♣ over my 1♦ im in a situation where i can describe my hand nearly perfectly. I do not have to have a cure to a problem that does not exist, i guess.
I tried to point out that this hand is not balanced because it aint. Thats why i do not have to bid it like a one, IMO 1 ♦ is correct opening.
What comes to u math, i dont wanna argue with that. My opinion is still that this hand aint 20-22 point balanced hand, my opinion is that stiff K is not worth 3 hcp. Im not trying to say that u r wrong just telling what i think .
With bidding contest i meant those that r organized in say some magazine or bidding panels, but never mind bout that. I think this panel is fine and prestige too so here u won by one vote, maybe this is just a question of styles. U style is treat this as 20-22 balanced hand, mine is open this with 1 ♦. And it will be so in the future too.
U dont by no means have to reply to me, and im sry if i have irritated u. To me this has been amusing and intresting discussion, thank u for that .

[MrAce]

tolvyrj, on 2011-June-01, 15:45, said:

What i mean bout this thing going circle was that i seem to be repeating my self.

You got that part right

tolvyrj, on 2011-June-01, 15:45, said:

U dont by no means have to reply to me, and im sry if i have irritated u. To me this has been amusing and intresting discussion, thank u for that .

You are more than welcome, it was my plessure untill i realized that the points you are making were actually just replying for the sake of replying as oppose to what i did, which was to come up with sources and examples and methods, and votes instead of repeating the same thing on and on.

Debates are always fun, but when someone close his eyes, and then puts his hands on his ears and hysterically repeats the same thing "Its not balanced, its not balanced, its not balanced , its not balanced...." It indeed becomes irritating.(Unless i am being paid for babysitting) But you dont have to appologize for that, because one can be irritating only if another one pays attention which definetely wont be the case anymore

[Free]

tolvyrj, on 2011-June-01, 15:45, said:

With bidding contest i meant those that r organized in say some magazine or bidding panels, but never mind bout that. I think this panel is fine and prestige too so here u won by one vote, maybe this is just a question of styles.

No 2NT bidder claimed that opening 1♦ is bad, but you're the only 1♦ bidder that claims 2NT is absolutely wrong. You also claim that any decent panel from a magazine would chose 1♦ over 2NT, while we have some world champion in our midst. So basically MrAce didn't win by 1 vote but by 8!

[Lurpoa]

Bbradley62, on 2011-May-28, 18:23, said:

Playing an Indy, I opened 1♦ with:

---

LHO overcalled 1♥ and pard bid 1♠ and I chose to simply bid 4♠ instead of investigating further. When my hand was exposed as dummy, I was greeted with:
[LHO]→Table: oh my god only 1 diamond????
She said that this was a clear 2NT opener. How common is it these days to open 2N (or 1N, with proper HCP) with a singleton?

Fully agree with the Hog.
I would have opened 2NT, but 1D is fine.