Re: Current wisdom on TOX
- From: gandalfnf@xxxxxxx
- Date: 28 Jan 2006 07:22:08 -0800
I hand forgotten all about the BWS on this issue. Thought I might
share it hear to show how much the 'standard' might be considered to be
in flux. The experts and readers were given 4 possible answers to each
sequence
a) minimum
b) about a queen more than minimum
c) about an Ace more than minimum
d) about an Ace and queen more than minimum
After each sequence below the first number represents the experts that
picked it and the second number the readers that picked that choice
1) (1C) X (P) 1S (P) 2S
a) (7,22) b) (17,24) c) (71,35) d) (5,19)
2) (1C) X (1H) 1S (P) 2S
a) (24,18) b) (37,34) c) (38,47) d) (1,1)
3) (1C) X (P) 1S (2C) 2S
a) (27,16) b) (50,44) c) (22,39) d) (1,1)
4) (1C) X (1H) 1S (2C) 2S
a) (51,30) b) (36,38) c) (13,30) d) (0,2)
Not included was the case where opener raised responder's suit but if
the trend is worth anything I'd wager even more experts would pick 2S
as showing no more than a minimum.
What the number do show is that the old tradition that a raise by the
doubler shows 16+ is fading and in one case (case #2) there isn't even
a major consensus as to what is the right meaning and in 3 of the 4
cases there is strong support for each of the minority positions.
Put me in the a column on all 4. A true believe in the LOTT.
Nick France
.
- References:
- Current wisdom on TOX
- From: raija d
- Re: Current wisdom on TOX
- From: Bud H
- Current wisdom on TOX
- Prev by Date: Re: Marking bidding blocks
- Next by Date: Re: 1NT Semi-forcing
- Previous by thread: Re: Current wisdom on TOX
- Next by thread: Drinking from a Firehose
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|