[frank0]

---

---

---

---

Any idea(useful partnership agreement) about the difference between all these auctions?

[Lurpoa]

frank0, on 2011-June-04, 23:46, said:

---

---

---

---

Any idea(useful partnership agreement) about the difference between all these auctions?

After the X, any bid shows extra's...
The other interventions are clearly conventional,and you should agree with your partner on the continuations. I would keep the X to show the willingness to double any further bid. Pass is anyway forcing.

[mgoetze]

Lurpoa, on 2011-June-05, 01:27, said:

I would keep the X to show the willingness to double any further bid. Pass is anyway forcing.

I think you misunderstood the question.

By the way, it's not very helpful that you mention in every other post that you should agree all sorts of things with your partner. We know that.

[Lurpoa]

mgoetze, on 2011-June-05, 01:53, said:

I think you misunderstood the question.

By the way, it's not very helpful that you mention in every other post that you should agree all sorts of things with your partner. We know that.

Oh, yes. Indeed, misread the question. Sorry.


Indeed, very good question, which need to be resolved by a partnership which needs to to last..... And indeed, because of the risk involved for this intervention after the 2/1 game-force. it is very usefull to gave good agreements with your partner.

And indeed all those sequences could indicate different distributions: 5-5s, 6-5s,....

Cannot give a lot of advice, besides the fact, to make sure that your partner understands the same thing. I have no knowledge of partnerships who have resoved the question, but I will do some research, and report here.

[Lurpoa]

frank0, on 2011-June-04, 23:46, said:

---

---

---

---

Any idea(useful partnership agreement) about the difference between all these auctions?

... mind that those sequences do not necessary indicate 2suited hands.
2♠ and or 3♦ could be used to show (very good) uni-colored hands as is suggested in Pavlicek's system.

That is why it is so important to agree with partner....

[mgoetze]

Some people will bid 2♦ on only 3 cards. 3♦ should be a natural bid.

[whereagles]

frank0, on 2011-June-04, 23:46, said:

Any idea(useful partnership agreement) about the difference between all these auctions?

You can distinguish them all in any way you want, e.g. X/2S/2NT/3D = 55/56/65/66.

But you don't need to do that. All those auctions are VERY RISKY so you really only butt-in with decent two-suiters, the kind partner only chooses the lesser evil. So Dbl for a mildly defensive hand and 2NT for a more offensive one will be perfectly enough. No need to make heavy weather out of the situation.

[fromageGB]

My standard agreement is that
   X is takeout for the other 2 suits with no preference,
   cue bid of 1st suit = 2 suited but preference for lower ranking,
   cue bid of second suit, or 2NT if cheaper, = 2 suited with preference for higher ranking.
(latter 2 probably 65)
So the 3♦ bid has no useful meaning for me. I would assume partner has a no preference takeout and 66, but with that I would just X anyway.

[Wackojack]

1. 4♥ + 4/5♣
2. 6♥ + 4♣
3. 5♥ + 5/6♣
4. 4♥ +6♣

Always the same principle in any sandwich position. If too risky or futile then don't do it.

[nige1]

IMO, Strong hand 4-4 or 5-4 (or 5-5 without concentrated values) in the unbid suits.

---

IMO, Shapley hand, at least 5-5 in the unbid suits.

---

IMO, Skew shapely hand: at least 6 ♣ and 4+ ♥

---

IMO, Skew shapely hand: at least 6 ♥ and 4+ ♣
Some play the last two as natural but pass seems better with length in their suits.
Whrn opponents are more limited than in this exampe, it may be better to cue the opponents suit, in which you hold a stop for notrump

---

[cherdano]

nige1, on 2011-June-07, 08:51, said:

IMO, Strong hand 4-4 or 5-4 (or 5-5 without concentrated values) in the unbid suits.

---

IMO, Shapley hand, at least 5-5 in the unbid suits.

---

IMO, Skew shapely hand: at least 6 ♣ and 4+ ♥

---

IMO, Skew shapely hand: at least 6 ♥ and 4+ ♣
Some play the last two as natural but pass seems better with length in their suits.
Whrn opponents are more limited than in this exampe, it may be better to cue the opponents suit, in which you hold a stop for notrump

---

I find these suggestions revolting. With a balanced hand you should just keep quiet. Doubling on 4-4 or forcing to the 3-level with just 5-5 or 6-4 on this auction (opponents are in a game force, but haven't found a fit) is very very very very crazy.

[nige1]

cherdano, on 2011-June-07, 15:00, said:

I find these suggestions revolting. With a balanced hand you should just keep quiet. Doubling on 4-4 or forcing to the 3-level with just 5-5 or 6-4 on this auction (opponents are in a game force, but haven't found a fit) is very very very very cray.

Would Cherdano pass with all the following hands? Crazy or not, IMO you should:

• Double with ♠ xxx ♥ AKJx ♦ xx ♣ AKQx (Most of us have held stronger hands than this in such contexts)
• Overcalll 2N with ♠ xxx ♥ KQJTx ♦ - ♣ KQJTx
• Overcall 2♠ with ♠ xxx ♥AKTx ♥ - ♣ KQJTxx
• Overcall 3♦ with ♠ xxx ♥KQJTxx ♦ - ♣ AKJx

[dustinst22]

After an auction like 1♣ (P) 1♥

I play it as:

X = opening strength
1N = light takeout
2N = Lots of distribution takeout
2♣/♥ Natural

With the 2-level overcall obv its different

1♠ (P) 2♦

X = Good hand
2N = Shapely hand, not as strong as above in terms of HCP
The cue bids are clearly diff here since both opps are showing 5-card suits instead of possibly only 4 above.
I'd take 2♠ as longer hearts and clubs (i.e. 6-4?)
3♦ as 6-4 clubs/hearts or better?