[quiddity]

Scoring: MP

P 1♣ P 1♦
2♣ X 3♣ 3♦
P P P

---

1C = 15-20 hcp , any shape
1D = 0-6 any shape or 6-12 with no 4cM

Random club-game opps.

[Echognome]

South for not showing 6+ with 4♠. KJT9x is enough of anupgrade to count the hand as 6 hcp.

[pooltuna]

quiddity, on Oct 2 2009, 01:25 PM, said:

Scoring: MP

P 1♣ P 1♦
2♣ X 3♣ 3♦
P P P

---

1C = 15-20 hcp , any shape
1D = 0-6 any shape or 6-12 with no 4cM

Random club-game opps.

What is X instead of 3♦

[awm]

While I think 1♦ was okay, after partner's takeout double south should push for game. Opener will not be minimum with club wastage. I like 4♣ over 3♣ (two places to play) correcting 4♥ to spades.

[quiddity]

pooltuna, on Oct 2 2009, 01:34 PM, said:

What is X instead of 3♦

No agreement apart from generic competitive/responsive.

[jdonn]

Perhaps north shouldn't have acted at all. If he passed then south could have made the takeout double which would have made things much easier.

[mike777]

quiddity, on Oct 2 2009, 01:25 PM, said:

Scoring: MP

P 1♣ P 1♦
2♣ X 3♣ 3♦
P P P

---

1C = 15-20 hcp , any shape
1D = 0-6 any shape or 6-12 with no 4cM

Random club-game opps.

IF I understand your system south can have 6-12 hcp and no 4 card major, how can north pass?

what is x by North compared to 3d or pass?

[quiddity]

jdonn, on Oct 2 2009, 03:29 PM, said:

Perhaps north shouldn't have acted at all. If he passed then south could have made the takeout double which would have made things much easier.

We briefly considered it in the post-mortem, but when north passes south will tend to play him for a balanced 15-17 and 3+ clubs so I guess there's a risk that 2C might be passed out if South has 3 clubs. I'm not sure how aggressive South should be when reopening with some length in their suit.

BTW, we are playing a system based on Marshall Miles' Unbalanced Diamond here.

[ArtK78]

Why can't North do something rational, say, bid 2♠ over 2♣?

Why has no one suggested bidding 2♠ over 2♣?

To me, the double of 2♣ (or at least a lack of a firm understanding of what the double meant) is what led to the disaster.

[Phil]

No strong feelings about 1♦ vs 1♠.

I think North has a clear 2♠ call. Doubling and passing risks losing 5-3 spades.

[jdonn]

quiddity, on Oct 2 2009, 03:50 PM, said:

jdonn, on Oct 2 2009, 03:29 PM, said:

Perhaps north shouldn't have acted at all. If he passed then south could have made the takeout double which would have made things much easier.

We briefly considered it in the post-mortem, but when north passes south will tend to play him for a balanced 15-17 and 3+ clubs so I guess there's a risk that 2C might be passed out if South has 3 clubs. I'm not sure how aggressive South should be when reopening with some length in their suit.

I am not seeing the problem with the possibility of defending a vulnerable 2♣ contract when our two hands are 15-17 balanced with 3+ clubs opposite 0-6 with 3 clubs. And doesn't north essentially have a balanced 15-17 anyway?

I agree with most people about south under/misbidding too, and the ones saying north should bid 2♠ instead of double also have merit. There were simply a lot of questionable decisions made that didn't work out in the end. Not to mention, I have told Marshall a number of times what I think of his system hehe.

[quiddity]

jdonn, on Oct 2 2009, 04:09 PM, said:

I am not seeing the problem with the possibility of defending a vulnerable 2♣ contract when our two hands are 15-17 balanced with 3+ clubs opposite 0-6 with 3 clubs. And doesn't north essentially have a balanced 15-17 anyway?

I'm misunderstanding something. The suggestion was that North might pass instead of doubling, and the problem is that North does not have 15-17 balanced with 3+ clubs.

[jdonn]

quiddity, on Oct 2 2009, 04:38 PM, said:

jdonn, on Oct 2 2009, 04:09 PM, said:

I am not seeing the problem with the possibility of defending a vulnerable 2♣ contract when our two hands are 15-17 balanced with 3+ clubs opposite 0-6 with 3 clubs. And doesn't north essentially have a balanced 15-17 anyway?

I'm misunderstanding something. The suggestion was that North might pass instead of doubling, and the problem is that North does not have 15-17 balanced with 3+ clubs.

Sorry I see where this went wrong now. Anyway pass by north shouldn't promise 3+ clubs, he could be 2452 or something. If he is a balanced 15-17 with shapes like this he may want to pass rather than risk the wrong fit, or find partner on a weak hand with club length where defending undoubled is the best option. Bidding isn't bad but it's risky and it could easily be right for north to pass.

My point is the opponents are vulnerable and haven't promised a fit. Defending is allowed to be right, especially when the alternative is either a bit of a misdescription (double) or dangerous on a lousy suit (2♠).

[akhare]

jdonn, on Oct 2 2009, 04:09 PM, said:

Not to mention, I have told Marshall a number of times what I think of his system hehe.

Another usual suspect who shall go unnamed summed up his reaction when someone told him they played unbalanced ♦ as follows:

"Why??!!"

[jdonn]

akhare, on Oct 2 2009, 06:15 PM, said:

jdonn, on Oct 2 2009, 04:09 PM, said:

Not to mention, I have told Marshall a number of times what I think of his system hehe.

Another usual suspect who shall go unnamed summed up his reaction when someone told him they played unbalanced ♦ as follows:

"Why??!!"

Lol, the biggest insult he ever gave me was mentioning that he was considering mentioning me in his book about it since I had contributed to some idea. The way it really went was he gave me an awful idea, I came back with what I thought was a decent idea in the circumstances, and he changed it back to a far worse idea then tried to give me the credit.

I don't know if I got mentioned or not.

[quiddity]

Awesome - now I know who to thank for some of the more interesting system treatments..
Anyway, the system doesn't have much relevance to this hand except that 1C is limited. It sounds like this was mostly an issue with hand evaluation - I didn't think the south hand was a game-force opposite the limited club.
What hand do you visualize for south's 3D free-bid?

[DanHarting]

What do you do with:

♠ KQ762
♥ AQ98
♦ Q2
♣ A5

Favorable at matchpoints after your RHO deals and opens 2C natural?

(Say similar to precision, 11-15 and often six clubs.)

[jjbrr]

DanHarting, on Oct 14 2009, 02:10 PM, said:

What do you do with:

♠ KQ762
♥ AQ98
♦ Q2
♣ A5

Favorable at matchpoints after your RHO deals and opens 2C natural?

(Say similar to precision, 11-15 and often six clubs.)

dbl

[pooltuna]

DanHarting, on Oct 14 2009, 02:10 PM, said:

What do you do with:

♠ KQ762 
♥ AQ98 
♦ Q2 
♣ A5 

Favorable at matchpoints after your RHO deals and opens 2C natural?

(Say similar to precision, 11-15 and often six clubs.)

looks like you have to choose between X and 2NT. 2NT is about right on strength but X gets both majors into the picture and you will have to bite the bullet and bid 2♠ over 2♦. You will also have to bite the bullet over 2♥ or 2♠ and raise and you really are just a bit too weak for that. So I will try 2NT

[Jlall]

I like north's double, and agree with adam that south has to drive it home after that. I prefer Xing 3C to bidding 4C, I am concerned about partner being 3532 for his double where I need to get to hearts. 4C does not resolve that unless we pass a a 4H bid but then we might play 4H opp 4432.

We also might need to get to hearts opposite 3433, or we might just need to defend 3C X opposite that shape.

For those who think bidding 2S is obvious, have fun playing 2S opposite 1-5 in the majors!