BBO Discussion Forums: 23hcp 4441 - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

23hcp 4441

#21 User is offline   mikl_plkcc 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 417
  • Joined: 2008-November-20
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:sailing, bridge

Posted 2012-May-25, 07:13

I normally open 2♣ on hands with 20+ HCPs unbalanced or 4- losers, so I open this 2♣. Then I would bid my strongest suit (♥), pretending that I have 5, and bid the others until a fit is found. However, if partner bids ♣, I would immediately run to NT. (partner expects any suit rebid to have 5 unless 4-4-4-1)
1

#22 User is offline   Antrax 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,458
  • Joined: 2011-March-15
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2012-May-25, 23:15

Do the opponents also treat your suit as 5 cards? Could you show an auction if responder has ♠Qxxxx ♥xxx ♦Kx ♣xxx?
0

#23 User is offline   mikl_plkcc 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 417
  • Joined: 2008-November-20
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:sailing, bridge

Posted 2012-May-28, 04:57

View PostAntrax, on 2012-May-25, 23:15, said:

Do the opponents also treat your suit as 5 cards? Could you show an auction if responder has ♠Qxxxx ♥xxx ♦Kx ♣xxx?


If responder has a such hand, the final contract would be at 4♥, since everyone thinks that the 2♥ rebid is 5+ ♥s.
1

#24 User is offline   Antrax 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,458
  • Joined: 2011-March-15
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2012-May-28, 05:05

Oh. I had rather hoped you can get to 6♠. Do you feel your solution is better than opening 1♦?
0

#25 User is offline   mikl_plkcc 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 417
  • Joined: 2008-November-20
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:sailing, bridge

Posted 2012-May-29, 06:57

View PostAntrax, on 2012-May-28, 05:05, said:

Oh. I had rather hoped you can get to 6♠. Do you feel your solution is better than opening 1♦?


I afraid that the 1♦ would be passed out, especially when the opponents are vulnerable.

I'm designing an artificial system which reserves an opening bid for all 3-suited hands. If responder has interest, he bids an artificial response and opener bids his shortness. Then responder sets trump immediately.

1♦ (12+ 4441 or 5440)
- 1♠ (0-9, non-forcing)
3♠ (I have a very strong hand which can go game immediately even with no points in responder!)
- 4♠ (OK, I stop)

However, I can't find a way of showing slam interest, because no one has any slam interest.

Although I have a way to ask opener to bid his shortness, this applies only to 10+ responder hands as it is very important to stop early at the 1 or 2 level when responder has absolutely no values.
1

#26 User is offline   aguahombre 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 12,029
  • Joined: 2009-February-21
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:St. George, UT

Posted 2012-May-29, 10:23

Would recommend you do not expand to 5-4-4. Our agreement works for us with 2♦ for split range 4X1 hands of 11-14 or 23-25; and just opening with a 1-bid if in between.

The "mini-Roman" is disliked by many, and that is fine. It is effective within our framework of other auctions and we have developed a "one-under" continuation method which has proved quite effective. It would blow up, though if we included distributions other than 4x1.
"Bidding Spades to show spades can work well." (Kenberg)
0
  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

13 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 13 guests, 0 anonymous users