home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!usc!cs.utexas.edu!news-is-not-mail
- From: varvel@cs.utexas.edu (Donald A. Varvel)
- Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
- Subject: Ancient history
- Date: 30 Dec 1992 22:30:20 -0600
- Organization: CS Dept, University of Texas at Austin
- Lines: 33
- Message-ID: <1htt0sINNejl@im4u.cs.utexas.edu>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: im4u.cs.utexas.edu
-
- Today I received a response from The Bridge World to a letter I
- sent August 16 (!). The letter:
-
- Oh great answerer of questions:
-
- The newsgroup rec.games.bridge has been kicking this around
- for a week or so. Vul vs. not, RHO opens 1H.
- S: AK H: Jxx D: AKxx C: KQT9
-
- Ron Rubin in the Spingold doubled and bid 2C over partner's
- 1S response. The net.experts seem divided between passing
- over 1H and doubling and rebidding 1NT. An immediate 1NT
- has been suggested as well.
-
- What I would really like is to see this put to a panel.
- Lacking that, your thoughts would be appreciated.
-
- The response:
-
- Opinion here leans towards double-then-one notrump, with a
- strong minority choosing Rubin's sequence. We'll try the
- rebid problem in Master Solvers.
-
- My own thought is that if everything goes as you expect (here,
- opponents passing and partner bidding 1S) and your next call
- is posed as a problem in a bidding competition, there's something
- wrong in any case. ("There is something to be said for not
- bidding 4H if, when your opponents bid a not unexpected 4S,
- your next action gets into Bidding Forum." -- Jeff Rubens,
- commenting on a different hand.) The problem is that using
- standard methods this hand is simply unbiddable.
-
- -- Don Varvel (varvel@cs.utexas.edu)
-