BBO Discussion Forums: BP0-006B - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

BP0-006B Member voting contest is now over

#21 User is offline   Fluffy 

  • World International Master without a clue
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,404
  • Joined: 2003-November-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:madrid

Posted 2005-October-09, 21:52

Interesting both the juniors passing while the others getting in hehe
BridgeGod: my personal website with interactive problems and articles
0

#22 Guest_Jlall_*

  • Group: Guests

Posted 2005-October-09, 22:15

Fluffy, on Oct 9 2005, 10:52 PM, said:

Interesting both the juniors passing while the others getting in hehe

rofl, juniors are conservative :)
0

#23 User is offline   Walddk 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,190
  • Joined: 2003-September-30
  • Location:London, England
  • Interests:Cricket

Posted 2005-October-10, 00:33

Jlall, on Oct 10 2005, 06:15 AM, said:

Fluffy, on Oct 9 2005, 10:52 PM, said:

Interesting both the juniors passing while the others getting in hehe

rofl, juniors are conservative ;)

That's what makes it so exciting to comment on junior bridge. They do the exact opposite of what is considered "standard" by many of us :)

What about this example from the Danish Cup Final yesterday:

Dealer, non vul vs. vul
♠ 72
♥ 102
♦ J97643
♣ Q104

Why is it that the "obvious" 3♦ opening didn't cross my mind?

Roland
It's nice to be important, but it's more important to be nice
0

#24 User is online   helene_t 

  • The Abbess
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,101
  • Joined: 2004-April-22
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:UK

Posted 2005-October-10, 01:10

Ed Hoogenkamp recomends opening 3♦ with this hand in his "Preemptief bieden" booklet (at favorable, 3♦ is weaker than 2♦). But maybe he was a junior when he wrote it, it's a fairly old book.
The world would be such a happy place, if only everyone played Acol :) --- TramTicket
0

#25 User is offline   Chamaco 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,908
  • Joined: 2003-December-02
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Rimini-Bologna (Italy)
  • Interests:Chess, Bridge, Jazz, European Cinema, Motorbiking, Tango dancing

Posted 2005-October-10, 02:28

I think that, over my double, pard shall bid 3NT with any excuse (even holding a potential 44 H fit) if he has a decent hand and spades stopper.
"Bridge is like dance: technique's important but what really matters is not to step on partner's feet !"
0

#26 Guest_Jlall_*

  • Group: Guests

Posted 2005-October-10, 07:57

Walddk, on Oct 10 2005, 01:33 AM, said:

Dealer, non vul vs. vul
♠ 72
♥ 102
♦ J97643
♣ Q104

Why is it that the "obvious" 3♦ opening didn't cross my mind?

Roland

Clear 3D roland, not sure what you were thinking ;) lol.
0

#27 User is offline   Blofeld 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 775
  • Joined: 2005-May-05
  • Location:Oxford
  • Interests:mathematics, science fiction, Tolkien, go, fencing, word games, board games, bad puns, juggling, Mornington Crescent, philosophy, Tom Lehrer, rock climbing, jootsing, drinking tea, plotting to take over the world, croquet . . . and most other things, really.

  Posted 2005-October-10, 08:16

While I can see the merits of opening 4♦ with that hand, I think that opposite an unpassed hand this is a bit much (you could be missing 3NT!), and we conservative juniors will restrict ourselves to a simple middle-of-the-road 3♦.
0

#28 User is offline   Gerben42 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 5,577
  • Joined: 2005-March-01
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Erlangen, Germany
  • Interests:Astronomy, Mathematics
    Nuclear power

Posted 2005-October-10, 08:26

About Ed Hoogenkamp (Altocampo)

Actually he hadn't been a junior for some years when he wrote it. I've played the "3 weaker than 2" style for a while and liked it. But then I moved to another country and didn't get many followers of this style ;)
Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do!
My Bridge Systems Page

BC Kultcamp Rieneck
0

#29 Guest_Jlall_*

  • Group: Guests

Posted 2005-October-10, 08:26

Well, partner will never play you for this strong of a hand for a 3D bid at this vulnerability, so you will probably miss 3N anyways.
0

#30 User is offline   Walddk 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,190
  • Joined: 2003-September-30
  • Location:London, England
  • Interests:Cricket

Posted 2005-October-10, 08:27

Blofeld, on Oct 10 2005, 04:16 PM, said:

While I can see the merits of opening 4♦ with that hand, I think that opposite an unpassed hand this is a bit much (you could be missing 3NT!), and we conservative juniors will restrict ourselves to a simple middle-of-the-road 3♦.

Glad you didn't treat as a solid suit. Partner must know your style. 3NT was enough for him, holding

Axx
Axx
AKx
Axxx

It had no play on a spade lead when diamonds broke 3-1 (no queen singleton). Was he disappointed to go down? I'll ask him one of these days.

Roland
It's nice to be important, but it's more important to be nice
0

#31 User is offline   han 

  • Under bidder
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 11,797
  • Joined: 2004-July-25
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Amsterdam, the Netherlands

Posted 2005-October-10, 10:29

Walddk, on Oct 10 2005, 09:27 AM, said:

Blofeld, on Oct 10 2005, 04:16 PM, said:

While I can see the merits of opening 4♦ with that hand, I think that opposite an unpassed hand this is a bit much (you could be missing 3NT!), and we conservative juniors will restrict ourselves to a simple middle-of-the-road 3♦.

Glad you didn't treat as a solid suit. Partner must know your style. 3NT was enough for him, holding

Axx
Axx
AKx
Axxx

It had no play on a spade lead when diamonds broke 3-1 (no queen singleton). Was he disappointed to go down? I'll ask him one of these days.

Roland

Enjoy the discussion, but what's your point here Roland? Would you prefer not to be in 3NT with these hands? I think that 3D as weaker than 2D is certainly playable, and I hate playing against people who preempt this much at favorable vulnerability.
Please note: I am interested in boring, bog standard, 2/1.

- hrothgar
0

#32 User is offline   Walddk 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,190
  • Joined: 2003-September-30
  • Location:London, England
  • Interests:Cricket

Posted 2005-October-10, 10:37

Hannie, on Oct 10 2005, 06:29 PM, said:

Enjoy the discussion, but what's your point here Roland? Would you prefer not to be in 3NT with these hands? I think that 3D as weaker than 2D is certainly playable, and I hate playing against people who preempt this much at favorable vulnerability.

Of course I want to be in a 3NT that has roughly 53% chance of making. My point is that I would never open 3♦. Call it lack of imagination if you like. Because if I do with that hand, what am I going to bid on

xxx
xx
KQ10xxx
xx

4♦? 3NT broken minor? Pass? 3♦?. If the latter, how is partner supposed to judge?

Roland
It's nice to be important, but it's more important to be nice
0

#33 User is offline   cherdano 

  • 5555
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 9,516
  • Joined: 2003-September-04
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2005-October-10, 10:44

Walddk, on Oct 10 2005, 06:37 PM, said:

Hannie, on Oct 10 2005, 06:29 PM, said:

Enjoy the discussion, but what's your point here Roland? Would you prefer not to be in 3NT with these hands? I think that 3D as weaker than 2D is certainly playable, and I hate playing against people who preempt this much at favorable vulnerability.

Of course I want to be in a 3NT that has roughly 53% chance of making. My point is that I would never open 3♦. Call it lack of imagination if you like. Because if I do with that hand, what am I going to bid on

xxx
xx
KQ10xxx
xx

4♦? 3NT broken minor? Pass? 3♦?. If the latter, how is partner supposed to judge?

Roland

You could reread the text you are quoting, and then open 2♦.
The easiest way to count losers is to line up the people who talk about loser count, and count them. -Kieran Dyke
0

#34 User is offline   Walddk 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,190
  • Joined: 2003-September-30
  • Location:London, England
  • Interests:Cricket

Posted 2005-October-10, 10:48

cherdano, on Oct 10 2005, 06:44 PM, said:

You could reread the text you are quoting, and then open 2♦.

I wish I could when I have a hand like that, but that would be a misdiscription, given that it shows 4-7 hcp and 5-6 hearts or spades.

Roland
It's nice to be important, but it's more important to be nice
0

#35 User is offline   cherdano 

  • 5555
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 9,516
  • Joined: 2003-September-04
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2005-October-10, 11:14

Roland, you are getting silly. Some here are discussing whether a style where 3D is weaker than 2D (obviously both implying long diamonds) makes sense. You answer first by saying that opening these weak hands 3D in your style would lead to silly results. Then you go on saying that 2D would be something else in your system.
If you have nothing to add to this discussion, then why reply?

Arend
The easiest way to count losers is to line up the people who talk about loser count, and count them. -Kieran Dyke
0

#36 User is offline   JLOGIC 

  • 2011 Poster of The Year winner
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,002
  • Joined: 2010-July-08
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2011-January-04, 22:57

Weird I had a hand like this recently and I doubled. Double is automatic, I got this wrong.

Edit: Didn't see Fred bid 4H...that's pretty nasty actually. I guess I should say "bidding is automatic" since 4H could be > X
blogging at http://www.justinlall.com
1
  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users