tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6167918454701652348.post5571256317625972439..comments2024-03-11T11:29:56.577-04:00Comments on The Gargoyle Chronicles: Board 75Phillip Martinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12686740850642509457noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6167918454701652348.post-32189667227842210552010-01-11T20:58:43.172-05:002010-01-11T20:58:43.172-05:00I don't know if this is the best agreement or ...I don't know if this is the best agreement or not, but in my partnerships the working agreement for "serious 3NT" is a king above an opening bid, and so cue bids when serious 3NT was an alternative show less than a king over an opening bid. However, even with that agreement, a bid of 3S over an agreement of suit of 3H is ambiguous: a serious 3NT over 3H agreement denies SA or SK.<br /><br />We use that same agreement -- king above a minimum -- for similar auctions, such as distinguishing between weaker 1S-2C gf-2D-2S and stronger 1S-2C gf-2D-3S (where 4S instead would be the minimum "picture bid").Jeffrey.Lehmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00774815132410821811noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6167918454701652348.post-63099520158509912752010-01-11T08:12:22.614-05:002010-01-11T08:12:22.614-05:00Jeffrey,
I might be better disposed to treatments...Jeffrey,<br /><br />I might be better disposed to treatments like that if they were better defined. Subjective definitions like "serious" and "non-serious" worry me. It strikes me as about as effective as playing, say, subjective Blackwood, where 4NT asks you to rate your hand for slam purposes on a scale of 1 to 4. I suppose a convention like that might actually work for a partnership with good instincts who are perfectly in tune with each other. But I'm the first to admit my instincts and tuning are poor. I like definition.Phillip Martinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12686740850642509457noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6167918454701652348.post-77349677727636959392010-01-11T07:23:59.633-05:002010-01-11T07:23:59.633-05:00Hi, Phillip,
Is your adverse view of "pictur...Hi, Phillip,<br /><br />Is your adverse view of "picture bidding" treatment in a game forcing 2/1 auction affected by a partnership's coupling such treatment with "serious 3NT" (or "nonserious 3NT") cue bidding?<br /><br />I really appreciate your blog, which has become part of my daily bridge fix. Your blog is a great mix of entertainment and education. Thanks for sharing.Jeffrey.Lehmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00774815132410821811noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6167918454701652348.post-54152712434783602462010-01-10T19:11:48.782-05:002010-01-10T19:11:48.782-05:00I am not a fan of 1M-2X,2M to show 6 because it co...I am not a fan of 1M-2X,2M to show 6 because it comes up on <20% of hands where you open 1M, while using it as a catchall frequently saves space.CraigBhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04020709678426937691noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6167918454701652348.post-68608120155431791532010-01-08T08:05:15.636-05:002010-01-08T08:05:15.636-05:00Schools of thought discussions like the one today ...Schools of thought discussions like the one today are very helpful. Perhaps the competing ideas and their tradeoffs are obvious to better players and players who've been around long enough to see 2/1 ideas evolve. But they are not obvious at all to intermediates just learning 2/1 or even intermediates who have played 2/1 for a few years.Markhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05591906880798989728noreply@blogger.com