[bluejak]

jules101, on 2012-November-25, 20:49, said:

TWO QUESTIONS

Q1) Is East constrained from bidding 2♠ after East's hesitation?

Q2 How do you do rule?

Q1. Of course East is constrained because he has UI and Law 73C requires him to take no advantage.

Q2. No adjustment, of course.

The interesting question is not whether I adjust for 2♠, but whether I adjust if he passes. 2♠ is a pre-empt, and the UI that partner has near opening bid values suggests not pre-empting.

I poll, of course, and if enough people bid 2♠ then I adjust if he passes to whatever would happen if he bid 2♠.

An interesting example of "If it hesitates, shoot it." It is so easy to forget to ask what the UI shows.

[bluejak]

Vampyr, on 2012-November-26, 00:32, said:

Honestly? You would be just as comfortable making the bid if somehow you knew partner was practically broke?

Considerably more so, of course. Pre-empts tend to fail when partner has points, tend to work when he hasn't.

Zelandakh, on 2012-November-26, 09:20, said:

If I did not overcall 2♠ on this hand I would be guilty of fielding partner's BIT. This seems to come under the heading of "if it hesitates, shoot it". There is no way that the BIT suggests bidding 2♠ imho.

Wahey!

aguahombre, on 2012-November-26, 11:35, said:

Poll what? We already know that Pass and 2S are L.A.'s --subject to style and aggressiveness, not methods and peer issues. Would the poll be asking a bunch of people whether one or the other is demonstrably suggested? If that is the case, I didn't know we called that polling, rather than consultation.

That's one h*** of a presumption. You may know what "sound" WJOs are, but I don't, and for me to assume that I know is against the whole principle of polling.

I ask people what they would call if they were playing "sound" WJOs. It is a useful poll.

[Vampyr]

bluejak, on 2012-November-30, 13:47, said:

Considerably more so, of course. Pre-empts tend to fail when partner has points, tend to work when he hasn't.

Yes, of course that is true. My thinking was a bit muddled because it seemed that the OP wanted to disallow the 2♠ bid.