[blml] Réf. : Re: Is this a psych?

[Alain Gottcheiner]

-------Message original-------
 
De : 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.
 
# Who said it was an improvisation ?
We discussed that such a bid was merely asking, not showing a void.
 
Is the explanation "asking for aces outside spades" complete ? 
Are opponents right to think it shows a void, by "argumentum ad numerum"
(many think it does, so it should) ? If they are, we should warn them. 
But I've been taught such argumenta don't hold a bridge, only explanations,
CCs and (in some countries) names from conventions booklets have value.
 
A similar problem could happen when a player passes in a bad contract,
because one doesn't have any bid (while most pairs do). 
 
For example (another, rather old, live case), you open 2D, Flannery, and
partner passes with  2137 pattern, because 3C would have been a relay (in
lieu of the usual 2NT).
What if they question the pass on the grounds that "everybody would have bid
3C here, so the pass is a psyche" ?
 
 
Best regards
 
  Alain
 
 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.amsterdamned.org/pipermail/blml/attachments/20070419/5f909102/attachment-0001.htm 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1458 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.amsterdamned.org/pipermail/blml/attachments/20070419/5f909102/attachment-0001.jpeg 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 37059 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.amsterdamned.org/pipermail/blml/attachments/20070419/5f909102/attachment-0001.gif