1♦-(2♣)-x-(pass)
?
KQx-KJx-KJxx-xxx
Playing 5-card majors, strong notrump. Assume forcing freebids if it matters.
Page 1 of 1
Awkward response to negative double
#1
Posted 2022-April-01, 04:07
The world would be such a happy place, if only everyone played Acol :) --- TramTicket
#2
Posted 2022-April-01, 05:44
If you play strong NT with 5M and this bidding sequence, partner should realise that you might have this 3343 (weak NT) hand. That's why players prefer a 1♣ opening here. 2♦ is a false bid, promising 5+ ♦. 2♥ is better response to the neg X imo as you've been forced to bid, and partner should not expect 4♥ here. (Though one for partnership discussion and agreement.)
Btw The negative X bidder does not promise 4M in either ♥/♠ but a hand with values to bid, but with no obvious bid.
Btw The negative X bidder does not promise 4M in either ♥/♠ but a hand with values to bid, but with no obvious bid.
#3
Posted 2022-April-01, 09:57
Another day another problem over either 1♦-(P)-2♣ or 1♦-(2♣). I would introduce artificial responses over both.
#4
Posted 2022-April-01, 14:30
DavidKok, on 2022-April-01, 09:57, said:
Another day another problem over either 1♦-(P)-2♣ or 1♦-(2♣). I would introduce artificial responses over both.
Yup. For example, Han Peters suggested that dbl shows 4+ spades (with hearts and diamond tolerance but less than 4 spades he bids 2♦) and then you don't have this problem.
The world would be such a happy place, if only everyone played Acol :) --- TramTicket
Page 1 of 1
Helene_T 'Playing 5-card majors, strong notrump. Assume forcing freebids if it matters.
IMO, here 2♦ = ART Catchall. Might be 2 or 3 cards. Denies 4 card M.
To avoid devising a weirder structure