I was asked to comment. I don't like letting them play on the 2-level, but I have shown my hand already. In fact, I have TWO (not 1) clubs -- so am happy to defend. Could easily be that -90 is better than -100. Also, they could easily be in ...
Modern style for most would be 3♥ on that hand, not vul -- but it is a matter of opinion--no right or wrong. Occasionally, I've opened a weak-2 with a 7-card suit--more likely if vulnerable with something like: ♠Kx ♥Q1075432 ♦xx ♣xx.
No strong feelings on any of this. Pros and cons to all. Suffice to say that this is SIMPLE, EASY TO REMEMBER and exactly what David Berkowitz and I used successfully for 20 years. If anyone wishes to modify it, enjoy and good luck. No big deal either way and ...
Yuan,
Thanks for the kind words and appreciation. Some answers:
1) No plans (not for now, anyway) to make this into a book -- but that's not a bad idea :)
2) I am not a marketing guy -- but it would be nice to have more exposure for BW, LC Standard ...
I give in. I hear everyone. I think I agree. I've changed this section to plain old vanilla standard. Let the experienced players add all the fancy stuff. Let's go with the basics for LCStandard -- which is good enough for Hamman, so good enough for me.
Tough question with no perfect answer. I've talked to many of the top pairs who have this conflict (not just in the Meckwell/LC situation, but with other carding methods). As best I can tell, the most common agreement is: "low means you like it" -- so low from Q10x ...
Brian,
I don't go into this with Intermediate-Level students. I just cover your basic (win the ace of a suit and give partner a ruff with a S.P. card) situation.
As a teacher, I think it is important to stress ATTITUDE -- and try not to get too much ...
Good question. I see much more advantage to U.D. att. than count. I think many people got comfortable making the switch to U.D. Att, but didn't want to also switch to U.D. count. For most of my students, I recommend, neither, of course.
For LC Standard ...