From: bs@gauss.mitre.org (Robert D. Silverman)
Subject: Re: Arggggh!
Keywords: true, ouch
Organization: Research Computer Facility, MITRE Corporation, Bedford, MA
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 14:24:24 GMT

In article <1ih6saINNr45@s-crim1.dl.ac.uk> mbrgw@s-crim1.dl.ac.uk (R.G. Walters) writes:

stuff deleted....

>>But he asked about some strange 20+ 1NT opening. This is not the same as 2C.
>
>"Strange"?  It's Vienna (only a bit stronger), and we use it precisely to be 
 
But it is not Vienna, because you play it a bit stronger. Isn't Vienna
17-20? The fact that you don't play it as standard Vienna DOES make it strange.
And Vienna still isn't widely played, even in Europe.

>You've already made that abundantly clear. Well, if you've opened it 1D, and 
>it goes (4S) Pass (Pass), what does partner's pass mean now?
 
Once again, let me state: IT DEPENDS ON YOUR AGREEMENTS.

 
What partner's pass means depends on how high you play negative (or sputnik)
doubles. I play neg. dbles. through 7H, so partner's pass shows a very weak
hand. Note that at higher levels the the neg. double DOES become much more
nebulous. At this level it would say: partner I have some values, or maybe
a decent suit, but nothing good enough to bid at the 5 level. If you don't
play neg. dbles this high, then partner's pass simply says he has nothing 
worth bidding.

>It _isn't_ forcing, so what does the _net_ think is the best route to
 
What the _net_ thinks is (or should be) irrelevent. There are really only
2 or 3 people who post regularly whose opinion I would respect on this matter.
In any event, this hand is fairly simple: You reopen with a double, showing
substantial extras and short spades. This is fairly standard. On most hands
partner will sit and you will beat 4S a trick or 2. On a few hands partner
will sit and 4S will make [when they have both red aces and one is in dummy
and dummy has a trump to finesse your K]. On a few hands partner will hold
a long weak suit when 4S makes and he will pull to 5 of that suit. On
balance it is clear that a reopening double is correct.


>>:How 'bout with:
>>:
>>:     K4
>>:     A62
>>:     A
>>:     AKQJ743
>>:
>>:(You would open both these hands with 2C, wouldn't you?)
>>
>>Over 2C-4S-P-P, I bid a simple 5C. Why is this a problem? It's the
>>value bid on the hand; you have a minimum. The next move is up
>>to partner.
>>
>And go off when partner shows up with 
>
>xx
>QJxx
>KQJxx
>xx
>
So? What's your point in constructing the 1 positive response hand
out of many where 5C isn't cold? 5C still makes if  LHO has the K hearts.
[and if they don't find A spades, spade ruff at tricks 1-2;  LHO may
not want to lead the A from AQ with a 2C bid on his right].  It also makes if 
one of dummy's club spots provides an entry.
No game is cold above 3NT on this hand. You can't always make the right
decision over preempts. That's what makes them effective. Yet everytime
I post what the right thing to do is over a preempt, someone has to
construct an inappropriate hand for partner. Exactly what are you trying
to prove with this example? No bidding system will always allow you to
make the right choice over preempts, yet many weak players always seem
to expect that it should. Why else do they take the trouble to point out
[NO MATTER WHAT THE METHOD!] some hand for partner that makes the decision
wrong?? Exactly what do you expect the contract should be if partner holds
this hand? Dummy has a good offensive hand and little defense against a
spade contract. (secondary honors in long side suits are of dubious value
when defending high-level preempts). Opener does not have a good defensive
hand either, and opposite a partner who has shown a good hand via the
forcing pass certainly does NOT want to defend.  The 4S bid has robbed
the strong side of the room needed to find out that dummy's strength is
very concentrated in diamonds. The strong side does not have the information
that will allow them to find a penalty double of 4S.

I get a little tired of this. Everytime someone [not just me] presents a
set of methods for dealing with a bidding situation, someone else has to
point out that partner can have a hand that makes the final decision wrong.
I say: SO WHAT?  You can ALWAYS do this. What matters is having a reasonable
system that works MOST of the time. 

One sign of weak players is that they always seem to expect the perfect
result on every hand and that if you don't achieve this the methods must
be defective. Sometimes it takes a series of bids to describe two hands to
each other. Preempts rob you of the room to do this, so you wind up having
to make decisions with imperfect information, and sometimes you will simply
get it wrong. Expecting otherwise is hopelessly naiive.
--
Bob Silverman
These are my opinions and not MITRE's.
Mitre Corporation, Bedford, MA 01730
"You can lead a horse's ass to knowledge, but you can't make him think"