Help
You played with your regular pd. The following auction arose: (imp, Nil)
We No Ea So
-- -- -- 1♣
-- -- 1♦ 1N
-- 2♥?
Is 2♥ a transfer? Though regular partnership, but it is impossible to discuss all bidding situation. Any general guideline to follow in order to determine a bid's meaning?
Some may quote that if a bid can be natural, then it should be natural if undiscussed. But on the other hand, over strongish NT opening, transfer is the norm. So which should take the priority?
Page 1 of 1
Another bidding problem Transfer or not
#1
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 327
- Joined: 2003-September-04
- Gender:Male
- Location:Hong Kong
Posted 2007-January-25, 07:10
#2
- The Abbess
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 17,231
- Joined: 2004-April-22
- Gender:Female
- Location:Copenhagen, Denmark
- Interests:History, languages
Posted 2007-January-25, 07:16
I don't see the advantage of playing transfers here. Besides, the general rule about transfers is:
- Transfers never apply in undiscussed situations.
I suppose 2♦ is t/o, based on the general rule that a cue-bid is not natural in undiscussed situations unless common sense clearly says it must be.
- Transfers never apply in undiscussed situations.
I suppose 2♦ is t/o, based on the general rule that a cue-bid is not natural in undiscussed situations unless common sense clearly says it must be.
The world would be such a happy place, if only everyone played Acol :) --- TramTicket
#3
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 14,900
- Joined: 2004-May-11
- Gender:Male
- Location:Portugal
- Interests:Everything!
Posted 2007-January-25, 08:33
> the general rule about transfers is:
> - Transfers never apply in undiscussed situations.
Great rule! Gotta put this one in my system notes
> - Transfers never apply in undiscussed situations.
Great rule! Gotta put this one in my system notes
#4
- Brain Farts and Actual Farts Increasing with Age
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 9,586
- Joined: 2005-September-21
- Gender:Male
- Location:Lima, Allen County, North-West-Central Ohio, USA
- Interests:www.limadbc.blogspot.com editor/contributor
Posted 2007-January-25, 08:45
This reminds me of a bidding problem faced by a pro playing with a lump of goo.
The system parameters were odd. The auction may be technically off but on as to principle.
The Lump-of-Goo ("LOG") opened 1♣, artificial, showing 11-15 HCP, any shape. Her LHO overcalled 1♦. The pro doubled, although the practical bid would have been 1NT (bid notrump first). The RHO redoubled, and the LOG bid 1NT. This is odd, as the LOG never bids 1NT. This was passed to RHO, who preempted 3♦. This was passed to the pro, who bid 3NT in the dark, smelling a rat but with no clue where to go. This was doubled fiercely by LOG's RHO.
LOG now bid 4♥.
What is this? As a clue, the pro held something like ♠x ♥KJxxx ♦Axx ♣xxxx.
For the record, the end contract of 5♣ failed, notrump fails, but one game contract makes. I have heard that Rodwell gave 100% fault to the pro, because the excentricities of the LOG were well known and predictable.
The system parameters were odd. The auction may be technically off but on as to principle.
The Lump-of-Goo ("LOG") opened 1♣, artificial, showing 11-15 HCP, any shape. Her LHO overcalled 1♦. The pro doubled, although the practical bid would have been 1NT (bid notrump first). The RHO redoubled, and the LOG bid 1NT. This is odd, as the LOG never bids 1NT. This was passed to RHO, who preempted 3♦. This was passed to the pro, who bid 3NT in the dark, smelling a rat but with no clue where to go. This was doubled fiercely by LOG's RHO.
LOG now bid 4♥.
What is this? As a clue, the pro held something like ♠x ♥KJxxx ♦Axx ♣xxxx.
Spoiler
For the record, the end contract of 5♣ failed, notrump fails, but one game contract makes. I have heard that Rodwell gave 100% fault to the pro, because the excentricities of the LOG were well known and predictable.
"Gibberish in, gibberish out. A trial judge, three sets of lawyers, and now three appellate judges cannot agree on what this law means. And we ask police officers, prosecutors, defense lawyers, and citizens to enforce or abide by it? The legislature continues to write unreadable statutes. Gibberish should not be enforced as law."
-P.J. Painter.
-P.J. Painter.
#5
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 57
- Joined: 2006-July-15
Posted 2007-January-25, 20:26
kenrexford, on Jan 25 2007, 09:45 AM, said:
Spoiler
Seems like you added 2 additional cards for LOG
#6
- Brain Farts and Actual Farts Increasing with Age
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 9,586
- Joined: 2005-September-21
- Gender:Male
- Location:Lima, Allen County, North-West-Central Ohio, USA
- Interests:www.limadbc.blogspot.com editor/contributor
Posted 2007-January-25, 22:02
True that -- fixed it.
"Gibberish in, gibberish out. A trial judge, three sets of lawyers, and now three appellate judges cannot agree on what this law means. And we ask police officers, prosecutors, defense lawyers, and citizens to enforce or abide by it? The legislature continues to write unreadable statutes. Gibberish should not be enforced as law."
-P.J. Painter.
-P.J. Painter.
Page 1 of 1