Auction question Matter of agreement or some standard?
#2
Posted 2010-June-21, 17:27
I prefer 4♥ to not happen at all without prior discussion.
edit: in ours, we would have 6-3 with good cards in the 2 majors, and a couple worthless doubletons in the minors.
#3
Posted 2010-June-21, 17:33
George Carlin
#4
Posted 2010-June-21, 17:35
gwnn, on Jun 21 2010, 05:33 PM, said:
my slow editing...I should have waited for your post.
#5
Posted 2010-June-21, 19:29
#6
Posted 2010-June-22, 02:20
In fact, I would nearly always bid 3H, since responder did not limit his hand
up to now.
With kind regards
Marlowe
PS: And I would definitly not agree, that 4H is a splinter.
Uwe Gebhardt (P_Marlowe)
#7
Posted 2010-June-22, 03:52
Crunch3nt, on Jun 22 2010, 02:29 AM, said:
I don't think so. We could still wan to play in our 6-3 in spades even if we know we have a hearts fit.
I think 6322 with values concentrated in the majors make sense. Wouldn't assume this to be a splinter undiscussed.
#8
Posted 2010-June-22, 07:32
We are all connected to each other biologically, to the Earth chemically, and to the rest of the universe atomically.
We're in the universe, and the universe is in us.
#9
Posted 2010-June-22, 08:14
Thus, 2H just promised one rebid and that was 3♦ .
So a 3♥ support bid now by Opener would not be forcing.
That's my only explanation for the 4H bid.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
If the 2H bid WAS a 2/1 GF, then the delayed 4H-jump could be construed as a splinter* for the last bid suit ( ♦ ) , but I'd be afraid to use it.
________________________________________________________________
* " An unusual jump, which makes no sense otherwise, guarantees a fit for the last-named suit by Partner and shows a Singleton or a Void in the suit in which the jump is made. "
___________________________________________
The following are standard splinters in partner's original suit:
1♣ - 1♦
1♥ - 4♣! = splinter for ♥
1♣ - 1♠
2♠ - 4♣! = splinter for ♠, slamtry.
#10
Posted 2010-June-22, 08:14
#11
Posted 2010-June-22, 08:17
We are all connected to each other biologically, to the Earth chemically, and to the rest of the universe atomically.
We're in the universe, and the universe is in us.
#12
Posted 2010-June-22, 08:25
gwnn, on Jun 21 2010, 07:33 PM, said:
agree
#13
Posted 2010-June-22, 09:52
The hands that warrants concealment of an eight-card-fit, with a non-forcing bid, is so rare; a splinter in diamonds is much more likely to be usefull.
Also consider that 3♥ -something, 4♥ is an option too, so it isn't even all the hands.
If opener really wanted to suppres his hearts, he must have a hand that would love to hear 3♠ on 3♥.
I am not familiar with 2/1, but if 2♠ is forcing, picture makes more sense to me, than does splinter. But I don't find it clearcut.
Do not underestimate the power of the dark side. Or the ninth trumph.
Best Regards Ole Berg
_____________________________________
We should always assume 2/1 unless otherwise stated, because:
- If the original poster didn't bother to state his system, that means that he thinks it's obvious what he's playing. The only people who think this are 2/1 players.
Gnasher
#14
Posted 2010-June-22, 15:57
That's actually what it would be for me. 2♠ does not show 6, it is just a hand not strong enough to bid 3♦, or a hand too strong for 3♦ . (3♦ is about a 15/16 sort of strength.) But with 4 or 5 diamonds and 17+ I am delighted to go slamming.
#15
Posted 2010-June-23, 00:25
#16
Posted 2010-June-23, 07:02
2 ♠ showed 5+ spades, but Minimum.
After 3 ♦ partner shows real heart support (3+) and real Minimum (10-12).
3 ♥ had been stronger (13-14).
Roland
Sanity Check: Failure (Fluffy)
More system is not the answer...
#17
Posted 2010-June-23, 09:18
ONEferBRID, on Jun 22 2010, 03:14 PM, said:
Thus, 2H just promised one rebid and that was 3♦ .
So a 3♥ support bid now by Opener would not be forcing.
That's my only explanation for the 4H bid.
Nah, 3♦ is GF even in Acol.
If 2♠ is NF then 4♥ is a little weird but maybe it could be based on a very minimal hand with 6 chunky spades that didn't want to encourage too much by bidding 3♥ before.
Not sure if 3♥ would be forcing in SAYC (some sources say 1♠-2♥-3♥ is an exception to the rule a 2/1 promises a rebid, that makes no sense to me but maybe some people play that). But if 2♠ is forcing but 3♥ is not then this sequence makes perfect sense as a picture bid with 3-6 majors.
Dunno if we should assume 2/1 in threads like this. But as long as 2♥ promises a rebid it doesn't really matter here.
#18
Posted 2010-June-23, 10:23
helene_t, on Jun 23 2010, 10:18 AM, said:
Since this is the A/E forum, I would think so.
#19
Posted 2010-June-23, 10:28
hanp, on Jun 23 2010, 06:23 PM, said:
helene_t, on Jun 23 2010, 10:18 AM, said:
Since this is the A/E forum, I would think so.
???
Do not underestimate the power of the dark side. Or the ninth trumph.
Best Regards Ole Berg
_____________________________________
We should always assume 2/1 unless otherwise stated, because:
- If the original poster didn't bother to state his system, that means that he thinks it's obvious what he's playing. The only people who think this are 2/1 players.
Gnasher