[the hog]

I would definitely have passed and now totally agree with Mikeh's comment: "Having decided to respond, I honour the force, because, while I don't like my situation, I got myself into it by responding and it would be inconsistent to pass."

[louisg]

Here's another question for the passers (or those who would respond 1H and pass over 2S with a slightly weaker version of the original hand):

Let's say that 2S was your systemic rebid with a hand like ♠AKx ♥AKJx ♦AQJxx ♣x (i.e., "too good to splinter"). Of course, your agreements include ways to show this hand type as the auction continues (and still stop in 4H opposite true junk). Would you still be willing to pass this out in 2S?

[OleBerg]

Jlall, on Jun 10 2008, 05:21 PM, said:

OleBerg, on Jun 10 2008, 09:44 AM, said:

Jlall, on Jun 9 2008, 10:48 PM, said:

OleBerg, on Jun 9 2008, 02:36 PM, said:

Incidently, this hand is almost like the one from Michael Rosenbergs book. "Bridge, Zia and me", where he argues that passing a forcing bid is unethical.

lol, serious question, is english your native language? I think you don't understand what the word "unethical" means, or what Rosenberg was talking about, or what anyone else has said (since no one has argued that it's unethical, just bad bridge).

My post in this thread:

http://forums.bridge...showtopic=25531

contains a subtle clue to my native language.

I do of course owe you an apology for not being born in an english-speaking country.

I would also like to apology in advance for being born in 1966, thus be definition being old, slow-witted and incapable of understanding relatively simple concepts.

Another drawback to my old age is, that I actually have to read a book, before I can comment on it.

I guess english doesn't have to be ones native language for someoen to be great at being a douchebag in it! I am going to guess that you are also ignorant, idiotic, and rude in your native language too.

I am, and it's much easier.

[cherdano]

There is hope, Ole, as I am sure all long-time BBF readers can attest I have improved quite a lot at being an ignorant rude douchebag in English.

[ArtK78]

I don't know about being a douchebag (although some might disagree), but if being born in 1966 makes one old, then I am ancient, having been born in 1956. Of course, the hand that sparked this thread came up while I was playing with David Treadwell, who was born in 1912!

I guess that is beyond old.

[Vilgan]

Imps.. I don't think pass is a great option. Many many hands partner could have that 4♠ will make, especially with the likely club lead incoming. If there is any way I can show a desire to stop short of game in spades, I will do so. If not, I will bid 4♠ immediately as this should show weakness.

At matchpoints, I will celebrate the fact we are already in the right strain and will preserve that luck by passing. 170 and 420 both beat 110. -50 in 4 spades gets me a bottom when 140 in 2 spades would have gotten me a top.

In all cases, I think both members of the partnership should make the bid that is most likely to result in the best score. I consider the "passing a forcing bid is unethical" to be nonsense.

[Codo]

Vilgan, if you are not able to read your partner who comfortable he is with his bid, you don't play with him enough- or just online or with screens.

And if you read your partner and have a feeling that his bid might be a little bid of a strech and you pass or you bid on because his 2 ♠ came like a bullet out of a pistol, then this is unethical.

Of course, if you always pass with this hand after 2 Spade from partner, everything is fine. But I doubt that you do this.

For the bridge question: I leave the + 170 to the youth and bid on. I try 2 NT, after all I stop the clubs.

Besides the other reasons given for bidding, I am practically forced to bid, because we play that many strong two suiters will be opened at the one level. And with this approach you cannopt pass partners response.

[gnasher]

Codo, on Jun 11 2008, 07:22 AM, said:

Vilgan, if you are not able to read your partner who comfortable he is with his bid, you don't play with him enough- or just online or with screens.

And if you read your partner and have a feeling that his bid might be a little bid of a strech and you pass or you bid on because his 2 ♠ came like a bullet out of a pistol, then this is unethical.

Of course, if you always pass with this hand after 2 Spade from partner, everything is fine. But I doubt that you do this.

If I were Vilgan, I'd find this rather offensive.

[hotShot]

gnasher, on Jun 11 2008, 09:48 AM, said:

Codo, on Jun 11 2008, 07:22 AM, said:

Vilgan, if you are not able to read your partner who comfortable he is with his bid, you don't play with him enough- or just online or with screens.

And if you read your partner and have a feeling that his bid might be a little bid of a strech and you pass or you bid on because his 2 ♠ came like a bullet out of a pistol, then this is unethical.

Of course, if you always pass with this hand after 2 Spade from partner, everything is fine. But I doubt that you do this.

If I were Vilgan, I'd find this rather offensive.

Jlall, on Jun 10 2008, 05:21 PM, said:

I am going to guess that you are also ignorant, idiotic, and rude in your native language too.

Interesting that you did not find this offensive enough to make a comment.

[helene_t]

I was born in 1966, too, and have no problems commenting on books I haven't read. In fact being a non-native English speaker makes it easier since people will assume that inaccurate quotes come from the translation.

[gnasher]

hotShot, on Jun 11 2008, 09:23 AM, said:

Interesting that you did not find this offensive enough to make a comment.

I didn't say I found it offensive; I said I'd find it offensive if it were addressed to me.

I comment on what interests me, and not on what doesn't. What Justin said didn't have enough to do with bridge to interest me. Anyway, it would have been fatuous to point out that Justin's words were likely to give offence, as that was presumably what he intended when he typed them.

[ulven]

ArtK78, on Jun 10 2008, 10:56 AM, said:

David Treadwell, who was born in 1912!

Great to read that David is going strong. Played on a 4-handed team with him in the NA Swiss at the Phoenix 2002 NABC. What a funny and energetic man!

I agree with pretty much everything Justin has written here, only difference is that I would actually pass 2S. Probably shouldn't when playing with someone from ACBL-land though.

The style over here is to open a strong 2C with many more hands than over in NA, especially with 2-suiters with few losers. Although technically gameforcing, the norm is to do is anyway since partner often has something (statistically). This will get you overboard at times but makes some auctions easier and avoids silly jumpshifts into non-suits.

So, while you can still construct a hand that could make game in this approach, I think the odds favor pass. Even if you can make a game you might not reach a making one if you bid.


Edit: When I say I agree with Justin I meant his comments regarding the auction ;-)

[kenrexford]

Jlall, on Jun 11 2008, 03:25 AM, said:

I would think that most people would be about 10x more offended by having their ethics questioned than being called idiots, but that's me.

A friend of mine years ago played with a guy who tanked with xxx in one suit as his last three cards when declarer had to decide whether to pop the King or duck into what would obviously be a stiff Ace now. He explained to the TD that he was deciding which suit he preferred in this obvious suit preference situation. He wanted to appeal. My friend asked him whether he wanted to committee, for $50, to decide that he was an idiot or a cheat. He opted to withdraw the appeal.

Neither option is great. I agree, though, that I would argue idiot any day.

[Codo]

gnasher, on Jun 11 2008, 04:48 PM, said:

Codo, on Jun 11 2008, 07:22 AM, said:

Vilgan, if you are not able to read your partner who comfortable he is with his bid, you don't play with him enough- or just online or with screens.

And if you read your partner and have a feeling that his bid might be a little bid of a strech and you pass or you bid on because his 2 ♠ came like a bullet out of a pistol, then this is unethical.

Of course, if you always pass with this hand after 2 Spade from partner, everything is fine. But I doubt that you do this.

If I were Vilgan, I'd find this rather offensive.

After reading this I realiszed that the combination of "Vilgan" and "you" gave my text a very wrong picture.

So sorry Vilgan, it was in no way intended as an offense against you.

I just tried (and failed) to pointed out why I share Rosenbergs view that passing a forcing bid could be easily done because of unethical reasons.

Of course I had no intention to blame you for doing so. So please excuse my bad wording.