[blml] Is this a psych?

[Robert Geller]

The difference is that when you and your pard both
have strong hands you're unlikely to be keeping the oppts
out of the auction when they should be in, so your 
4S is a clever improvisation.

On the other hand responses of 2nt to a weak 2 ("ogust lite")
or to a multi 2D ("asking lite") may well have the effect (especially
against weaker players) of quasi-bluffing them out of the auction
when they should be in.   Also the relative frequency of "2nt lite"
is likely to be much greater.....  So there is a much greater
chance of having discussed whether or not "2nt lite" is being
used or having created an implicit agreement through experience, 
in which case the oppts are entitled to know.  

-Bob

Eric Landau さんは書きました:
>At 11:07 AM 4/18/07, Nigel wrote:
>
>>[Alain Gottcheiner]
>>I have one example from real life to offer, and the problem with it is
>>similar to the problem about the 2NT "relay".
>>
>>         Ax
>>         KQJx
>>         x
>>         KJxxxx
>>
>>1C      2C
>>2NT*    ?
>>
>>2NT = genuine clubs in a 15+ balanced type
>>You'd like to BW, but 4NT would be natural in your style. And bidding 3H
>>would only serve to pinpoint your problem (1 spade loser + 1 ace). Not
>>to mention that your problem remains if partner bids 3NT over 3H.
>>
>>So you bid 4S, an exclusion BW, and partner says "he asks me to count
>>keycards outside of spades". Right explanation !
>>
>>Usually, the reason for an E(R)(KC)BW will be a void in said suit, but
>>nobody said that at the table. The bid asks, it doesn't tell.
>>
>>This is a typical tactical bid, aimed at giving as few unnecessary info
>>as possible. Now, what if they interpret this as showing a void ? Can
>>they assume it does ? Was partner compelled to add : "doesn't tell
>>anything about that suit" or anything ?
>>
>>[nige1 snipped]
>>
>>[nige2]
>>Oh dear. I've changed my mind. On second thoughts, I believe that
>>Alain's partner's explanation is incomplete. He should add "4N is not
>>systemically available as an Ace asking bid, so partner may be 
>>improvising".
>
>Alain bid exclusion key-card, and his partner is busy toting up his key 
>cards outside of spades.  Why would he even be thinking about what 4NT 
>might have meant?  Why should it occur to him to mention it (or occur 
>to him at all)?  He knows that 4S is exclusion key-card; it's not as if 
>he is considering the meaning of the alternative 4NT call to help him 
>decide what 4S meant (which *would* require it to be disclosed).
>
>
>Eric Landau                     ehaa at starpower.net
>1107 Dale Drive                 (301) 608-0347
>Silver Spring MD 20910-1607 
>
>_______________________________________________
>blml mailing list
>blml at amsterdamned.org
>http://www.amsterdamned.org/mailman/listinfo/blml

-----------------------------------------------------
Robert (Bob) Geller,     Tokyo, Japan        geller at nifty.com