[Bbradley62]

Thank you

---

[mtvesuvius]

2♣ wtp... I'll pretend I had another jack if someone asks.

[Bbradley62]

mtvesuvius, on 2011-February-07, 11:07, said:

2♣ wtp... I'll pretend I had another jack if someone asks.

You are assuming inverted minors in an individual event? Wouldn't those tournies usually presume SAYC, which does not include inverted minors?

[mtvesuvius]

I'm assuming decent bridge, yes.

I hate problems where "Partner is clueless, what can you do get to the right spot without any input from partner at all?"

This hand is why inverted minors were invented, if I couldn't bid 2♣ I'd bid 1♥.

[Phil]

Bbradley62, on 2011-February-07, 11:10, said:

You are assuming inverted minors in an individual event? Wouldn't those tournies usually presume SAYC, which does not include inverted minors?

Oh, its an indy...

I tried an indy once, but I found the bridge and the people pathetic. It is an odd mix of people - most are seemingly waiting to die.

[Vampyr]

Bbradley62, on 2011-February-07, 11:10, said:

You are assuming inverted minors in an individual event?

Oh, I didn't notice this either. Probably 3NT then.

[Bbradley62]

mtvesuvius, on 2011-February-07, 11:15, said:

I'm assuming decent bridge, yes.

I hate problems where "Partner is clueless, what can you do get to the right spot without any input from partner at all?"

This hand is why inverted minors were invented, if I couldn't bid 2♣ I'd bid 1♥.

There's no need for your snarky attitude. Many players play SAYC, and it's the default understanding in many individual events, which the poll question indicates this is. If you hate problems that specify conditions under which you would not play, then you should refrain from responding.

[mtvesuvius]

I really don't get the point of this thread though, if you play Inverted Minors it's a clear 2♣, if you don't play them it's a clear 3♣, if you are spiting or masterminding it's a clear 1♥.

[Bbradley62]

This board is from a 78-table individual. The vast majority of Easts (reasonably) bid with KJxx, AKJ, xxxxxx, -; therefore, only four Souths faced this decision. Those four Souths made four different bids (none of which was 1♥), so I wanted to see what other people would have done.

[Free]

Indi or not, 2♣ wtp.

If partner doesn't play inverted minors, he might agree that this hand is worth 6-9HCP...

[Vampyr]

Free, on 2011-February-08, 03:05, said:

Indi or not, 2♣ wtp.

If partner doesn't play inverted minors, he might agree that this hand is worth 6-9HCP...

I'm not sure I see the connection.

[mcphee]

inverted minors is an 'agreement" in any system, commonly called a convention, just like jacoby, or a bergen raise. To say it is not part of sayc is a bit off the mark. 2C or 3C would need to be your response, unless of course you wanted to get that H bid in there

[Vampyr]

mcphee, on 2011-February-08, 07:31, said:

inverted minors is an 'agreement" in any system, commonly called a convention, just like jacoby, or a bergen raise. To say it is not part of sayc is a bit off the mark. 2C or 3C would need to be your response, unless of course you wanted to get that H bid in there

Inverted minors is probably not on the standard system card used for the event.

[aguahombre]

If it is defined as a "SAYC game", then according to the ACBL's SAYC booklet, there are only five choices to make ---and they all involve defensive carding and signals.

The booklet was published in 2003, and I don't see any revisions. I understand the SAYC convention card is often used as a base system, and in some events limited changes are allowed. Making an Indy an SAYC game is a great idea, and no alerts are even required. But "indy" does not imply it is really an SAYC game, unless specifically stated in the conditions.

[Echognome]

I also agree that it is 2♣ if playing inverted minors and 3♣ if playing that as our limit raise. The separate question is "what would you bid if all you knew was it was an indy tournament with such and such conditions." In the latter case, we are dealing with probabilities that partner will understand and the error if partner assumes the wrong thing. In that case, I think 2♣ is safer, since 2♣ as a single raise when 3♣ is limit is less of a distortion than bidding 3♣ as a preemptive raise when 2♣ is inverted.

[Bbradley62]

Thank you all for the input.

[HeartA]

2C or 3C, depending on whether you play inverted minor or not. 3N is another option.

[Lurpoa]

Playing SAYC: 3♣
Playing BWS200 (includes, inverted minors: 2♣.

3NT cannot be far away, hopefully, P can rebid NT...

[jh51]

My partner recently had a related, but simpler, situation. I opened her 6 card major! Her hand was somewhat weak otherwise, so she bid 4 and I made 5, losing just the 2 aces we were missing. I expected an average board in a 3 table game, but it was a zero. One pair was in 2 doubled, and Somone failed to cash their aces at the remaining table. (Had they not cashed both aces, I can take 12 tricks.)

[Lorneg]

2c if you use inverted minors (must be alerted if you use SAYC).
3c if standard SAYC .