jillybean, on 2013-July-31, 08:31, said:
I don't follow your analysis here, shouldn't East down grade the hand due to the largely wasted A♦ values?
The hands are also beginning to look like a 3card limit raise rather than a constructive raise.
An Ace opposite a known short suit is not a wasted value. A King would be a wasted value.
More important is the upgrade for secondary values in the other suits.
Using loser count evaluation, responder evaluates her hand on the basis of how many cover cards responder has for opener's losers. A game try by opener opposite a single raise implies that opener has a 6 loser hand. Responder's hand is T752 4 KT632 KJ6. Opposite the 1
♠ opening, responder had 4 potential cover cards (2 for the singleton heart, one for the
♦K and one for the
♣K), which is actually too good for a mere 2
♠ response. A Bergen mixed raise would be a better description of the hand (even a mini-splinter is not out of the question if you have the tools). Having bid 2
♠, responder hears opener make a short suit game try in diamonds. Responder immediately discounts the
♦K, but now counts the
♣K as a full cover card. The question then is whether the heart singleton is worth two cover cards. The best available call is 3
♥, saying that responder is still interested in game, but can't tell if all of her cards are working. Obviously, opener is going to bid game.
It is not unreasonable for responder to just bid game over 3
♦, despite the fact that the
♦K is wasted.