[Double !]

If I initially pass this hand, i bid 2 spades over 1 diamond in less than a heartbeat. What better hand could I have for a fit J-S: 4 controls, and a stiff. And, yes, J-S by passed hand = limit raise (aka fit J-S) is pretty standard last time I looked. What is the problem?

[luis]

2) "You don't need extra high card strength to make a splinter bid beyond what is needed to force to game. After 2/1 game is already forced. What you do need is the right distribution...4 trumps and a singleton equals the right distribution. Bidding 3 diamonds would not show this great distribution for playing in diamonds..."

I think I have to disagree with this tehory, the risk of going beyond 3NT wich is often your only makeable game when you open light and have a minor suit fit is a lot greater than the chance of finding a magic slam just because you show shortness now.

[Chamaco]

Walddk, on Apr 26 2005, 04:55 PM, said:

I am sure Mike Lawrence wouldn't mind a raise to 3♦ if I really had an opener. Remember that I said I wouldn't open the hand. Give me

AQxxx
Qxx
Axxx
x

then ML will surely raise diamonds too. But I will remember to ask him in Edinburgh on May 22nd. Let me bet 5 cokes in advance. Taken Mauro?

Roland

As promised, I post here some example hands taken from Mike Lawrence's book "The uncontested auction", where he describes guidelines for his 2/1 style.

You will find that Roland was right in saying that ML would not mind if opener takes some liberties in raising with a minimum as long as it has shape. (Roland I owe you 4 Cokes ! )

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Since someone mentioned the possibility of a splinter in support of diamonds, I also posted a few ML suggestions about that.

Chapter 3, Hand 19, page 50 (C3/H19/p50)

♠4♥AT875♦KQ86♣K73

1H-2D-?
"3D or, even better, if you use splinter raises, 3S"

MAURO's comment: After a fit is found, this becomes a better than minimum hand, and the LTC (6-losers) confirms it.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
C3/H38/p62
♠QJ7♥AQxxx♦KJ8♣Tx

1H-2D-?

"3D. You don't have much extra. But with a proven fit, the combined extras go up in value.
...
Opener is allowed to show some discretion with his raises on minimums"

MAURO's comment: This hand looks like a real minimum to me, yet ML raises anyway. As far as I can tell, this hand looks to me worse that the hand that started the thread (even with less hcp, that hand has nothing wasted, this one has the spades quacks).
This seems to clearly say that Roland was right in his claims.
Oh well, I think I just lost 4 Cokes, hehe !

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
C3/H47/p67
♠K32♥KQT86♦3♣AQT7

1H-2C-?

"4D. This hand is good enough to splinter with."


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
C3/H61/p75
♠Q73♥KQXXX♦QX♣ATX

1H-2C-?

FINALLY A HAND WITH GOOD SUPPORT BUT THAT CANNOT RAISE ACCORDING TO ML.

"2H. Your clubs are ok for a raise but your points are poor. 3clubs does not promise a huge strength but it does promise something above a minimum. It might be extras in hcp or in shape. This hand is minimum in all regards"


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
C3/H66/p78
♠Axx♥KQxxx♦xx♣ATx

1H-2C-?

"3C. This hand has the same shape and hcp of hand 61, which rebid 2H. The difference between these 2 hands is that this hand has no questionable values.
.....
It is a min raise but it is a raise"