[Vampyr]

mtvesuvius, on 2011-June-15, 10:38, said:

Anyway, pretty much every post she makes gets downvoted by someone, because they all have the same worthless and annoying advice -- Agree what the bid means with your partner... The posts that don't tell us to have an agreement with partner are usually some very badly thought out logic, or misinterpretation of some post or hand.

Just telling people to have an agreement with their partner is totally pointless, and is spam IMO

And there you have it, Lurpoa, that is why I downvote almost every single one of your posts.

I think that this is a bit unfair. Lurpoa's posts in this thread, at least, are pretty similar to other people's.

[MrAce]

I like what Justin said about preempts vs a passed pd.

OFFTOPIC: With all due respect to your rights of posting what you believe, Lurpoa, I also agree that advicing people to have a pdship agreement on each post is being annoying and is a kind of spam as Adam said.

At first i thought Justin was being harsh in some of his replies in forums, when i talked to him in private and read his replies over the time in these forums, i figured that he is genuinely saying what he believes is right. If i were you,when he disagres with you, instead of taking it personal and downvoting, i would take it as an honest answer. Not every good players spares their time to reply these topics each and every day. We have Justin, Andy, Francis, Cherdano, Helene,Phil,Csaba,Han,Adam, RHM,655321... and lot more i forgot to mention here that i love to read/debate.. even when i strongly disagree with them from time to time or even when they think my opinion was ridicilious.

And there are people like me, who tries to be better player tomorrow than today, not to prove anything to others but to themselves, and i see it as a great oportunity to debate/discuss/read these people in order to improve. Please dont discourage them with downvotes.

We all need to slow down and go easy with those downvotes, or it will lose its value and importance. Or maybe we will recieve more political replies compared to honest replies due to down and upvote scoring. I found myself upvoting people just because i thought they are downvoted unjustified or vice versa. Perhaps what i am doing is wrong too.

I am willing to see someone whose english is better than me to start a topic about discussing this new vote system.

I wont be offended to be downvoted for going off topic here, probably deserved. But i had to say it eventhough earlier i said i will not speak on this issue ever again.

Sorry

[gwnn]

Oops, I misclicked on -. I wanted to vote +. Sorry MrAce

[mgoetze]

Lurpoa, on 2011-June-15, 03:14, said:

But now: 1♦ overcall is OK. No, not a 2♦ overcall, which, will make it impossible to find a 44♠ fit.

Partner passed, your opponents opened, and the thing you are most worried about is missing a 4-4 spade fit? Bridge is not quite that simple.

[whereagles]

Pard is a passed hand, so 2♦ is fine. Over 2♥ West can bid 3♥, showing support and a max passed hand. This is done in case overcaller has an unusual preempt, as players sometimes have opposite passed hands.

[whereagles]

MrAce, on 2011-June-16, 07:49, said:

(...) downvotes. (...)

Something we could definitely live without. No need to revive the dark days of witch-hunting.

[jh51]

JLOGIC, on 2011-June-15, 02:28, said:

After preempting you should not bid again. But if you were going to pick a time to do so, a hand with great defense (for a preempt) and pretty bad offense when the opps have bid a partial is not the right time.

Partner can compete if it's right. And indeed, partner with 4 diamonds, a good hand, and a stiff heart will surely compete (or just bid 4D the first time).

Justin, perhaps one of us misread the OP. I thought the 2nd poll question was asking what West (partner, in your terms) should do with his hand. But then your next sentence answered that. Or maybe I was reading something into your response that is not there.

[blackshoe]

Not playing "standard" methods (in which a cue-bid would be Michaels), I would bid 2♣ playing Top and Bottom cue-bids a la Hardy. West can then comfortably jump to 4♦, as he will expect East to have 6 diamonds.

Playing "standard" methods, I'd start with 2♦, expect West to bid 3 over 2♥, and would pass over 3♥. Let partner decide whether to defend.

[matmat]

Lurpoa, on 2011-June-15, 00:24, said:

And indeed, I open on the W-hand: 1♦....♥♥♥

♥
whether to open 4144 1♣ or 1♦ depends on partnership agreement

[jmcw]

1♦ is fine in my book, I have decent values and a good suit. I don't see much upside in pre-empting when holding the ♠ suit.
If indeed a ♠ fit exists it will be much more difficult to locate if I bid 2♦ at my first turn. Another reason to forego the pre-empt is defensive potential with 6 points outside ♦.
IMO there are just too many flaws to bid 2♦.
I would open the West hand in 1st seat 1♦.