[blml] Réf. : Re: Broken the second rule of war [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

[Alain Gottcheiner]

-------Message original-------
 
Herman De Wael (casebook commentator):
 
>As to the asking about a card that one has oneself, I don't believe
>this to be a single case. I feel that pairs that employ this tactic
>should inform opponents of the possibility. Of course, that is
>difficult in an actual case, but at least a general mention on the
>convention card should draw the attention to it.
 
And there is the opposite case. On pair of friends of mine had the following
sequence :
 
1C*        2C**
4D***
 
* near-force ; either natural or 15-21 NT
** 10+ HCP, (4)5+ clubs
*** exclusion Roman BW, which was made on :  KQxx - KQx - Ax - AQ10x
 
4D doesn't necessarily imply a Diamond void, because 4NT would have been
natural (20-21, probably a doubleton club). 
Now, does the fact that 4D usually shows a void mean that *this* exclusion
BW should be explained as more than just an asking bid ?
 
IMOBO, the answer is no ; else, you should alert a BW 4NT when it is
possible that partner have a small doubleton, because "it usually ain't so".

 
Best regards,
 
   Alain
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.amsterdamned.org/pipermail/blml/attachments/20070220/ad6bd678/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/20070220/ad6bd678/attachment-0001.jpeg 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 21075 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.amsterdamned.org/pipermail/blml/attachments/20070220/ad6bd678/attachment-0001.gif