BBO Discussion Forums: 4/15 mentor vs mentees part 3 playing 2/1 - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1

4/15 mentor vs mentees part 3 playing 2/1 look at bidding/hand and decide how to proceed

Poll: what is your bid hand and bidding below (9 member(s) have cast votes)

no opp interference

  1. 3h (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  2. 3s asking for a partial spade stopper (3 votes [33.33%])

    Percentage of vote: 33.33%

  3. 3n (1 votes [11.11%])

    Percentage of vote: 11.11%

  4. 4c (3 votes [33.33%])

    Percentage of vote: 33.33%

  5. 4d (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  6. 4h (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  7. 4s (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  8. 4n (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  9. 5c (2 votes [22.22%])

    Percentage of vote: 22.22%

  10. 5d (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 User is offline   gszes 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,654
  • Joined: 2011-February-12

Posted 2014-May-29, 09:33

Your HAND Ax xx QJTx QJTxx the bidding has gone
1h 1n
2c 2s*
3d*

2/1 1n was forcing the 2s bid was artificial promising invitational
values and some fair reason why 2n may not have been a good choice. It
did not promise club support. The 3d bid showed a willingness to go to
game "stuff" in diamonds and fear of spades for nt the 3d bid is not
necessarily showing distribution. One special bid here 3s would be asking
for a partial stopper since opener would almost surely have bid 3n vs 3d
if it was reasonable to do so. good luck
0

#2 User is offline   hrothgar 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 15,372
  • Joined: 2003-February-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Natick, MA
  • Interests:Travel
    Cooking
    Brewing
    Hiking

Posted 2014-May-29, 10:34

View Postgszes, on 2014-May-29, 09:33, said:

Your HAND Ax xx QJTx QJTxx the bidding has gone
1h 1n
2c 2s*
3d*

2/1 1n was forcing the 2s bid was artificial promising invitational
values and some fair reason why 2n may not have been a good choice. It
did not promise club support. The 3d bid showed a willingness to go to
game "stuff" in diamonds and fear of spades for nt the 3d bid is not
necessarily showing distribution. One special bid here 3s would be asking
for a partial stopper since opener would almost surely have bid 3n vs 3d
if it was reasonable to do so. good luck


I have a maximum 1NT response (a hand good enough that your mentees seemed to prefer a game forcing 2C to my more pedestrian 1NT)
Partner has tried for game and I am happy to accept. No we just need to try for strain.

Make me down for a 3S bid. If partner holds Qxx or so, 3N rates to be our best contract.
If partner can't bid 3N, I'm going to angle for 4
Alderaan delenda est
0

#3 User is offline   gszes 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,654
  • Joined: 2011-February-12

Posted 2014-June-07, 08:55

This line has come to a grinding halt so I might as well show both hands
and finish the bidding

xxx AKxxx A Kxxx

Ax xx QJTx QJTxx

no opp interference

1h

1n (forcing)

2c 3+

2s (generic invitation does not promise club support) and some good
reason to not bid 2n.

3d willing to accept game invite "something" in diamonds for NT
not a patterning out bid (though it might be).

3s looking for a partial spade stop for 3n

4c inability to bid 3n (cannot bid 5 level because of 3 possible
spade losers off the top)

4s cue bid (just in case p is strong with lots of spade losers)

5c slam may be plausible but opposite a hand not strong enough to bid 2c
immediately it is unlikely and our club fit does not have to be so
dramatic.

Slam will probably make if the opps fail to lead a spade and even 3n has a
chance but should go down on a spade opening lead or even a spade switch after
winning the club ace.

Note the partnership tried very hard to find a major suit fit first (quickly
realized there was none) then tried very hard to bid nt and settled for a
minor suit game only after not being able to play 4M or 3N and having some
extra values.
0

#4 User is offline   Zelandakh 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,666
  • Joined: 2006-May-18
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 2014-June-07, 10:42

A thought about system here. Move the A to clubs and there appears to be no systemic bid that keeps 3NT in the picture. Once we have agreed to give up on patterning out in favour of, effectively, showing stops, perhaps it would be better for Opener to bid a suit where they need help here instead of where they have "stuff". That seems to handle everything.

Edit: just saw the forum. N/B readers please ignore this post, is just for the OP.
(-: Zel :-)

Happy New Year everyone!
0

#5 User is offline   P_Marlowe 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,030
  • Joined: 2005-March-18
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2014-June-14, 10:33

Hi,

looking at the auction, I gave opener 5431, I did not expect the single Ace of diamonds
to justify a 3D bid, a bid that showes values there.
Due to this, I have voted for 5C.

seeing both hands, the club fit was not discovered at the time the 3D bid was made, ...
I do think, the 2S should show 4+ clubs, so that opener knowes, the partnership has a fit,
if he has 4+ clubs himself.
The question is, do hands exist with less than 4 clubs, that would bid 2S?

With kind regards
Marlowe
With kind regards
Uwe Gebhardt (P_Marlowe)
0

#6 User is offline   PhilKing 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,240
  • Joined: 2012-June-25

Posted 2014-June-14, 11:42

The bidding should have gone 1-1NT-2-2-5.

Obviously 2 must show a max with clubs. Opener is willing to have a shot at game, and clubs rates to play much better than NTs. Slam is unrealistic, so there is no point farting about with 3 - all that helps achieve is perfect defence.
0

#7 User is offline   inquiry 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 14,566
  • Joined: 2003-February-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Amelia Island, FL
  • Interests:Bridge, what else?

Posted 2014-June-14, 13:43

The mentor or the mentee needs to stand up and change the method after 2 response.

The 2 bid should, of course, be the impossible 2 bid (search it here, many topics, or google impossible 2).

The impossible 2 can be played one of two useful ways.

Way 1. Good support for openers minor (better than a direct 1H-1NT-2m-3m raise), or

Way 2. Good three of a minor bid (can be in either minor, the one bid the opener or the other one, also better than the direct 3 minor over opener's 2minor)

If playing way 2, then opener is "forced" to bid 2NT to allow responder to show his minor, if playing way 1, the club fit is already found.

One can construct reasonable continuations after either way 1 or way 2, but what helps the auction is if opener can complete a distributional picture of his hand. If opener shows a 1-5-3-4 type hand with singleton spade and game interest, game is easily bid in clubs. IF opener shows a 3=5=1=4 hand with short diamonds and game interest you might easily land n 3NT. If opener shows a six card heart suit and good hand, 4 is in the picture. The thing is SOMEONE has to begin describing their hand. On the auction up to 3 in the OP, no one knows anything about the shape of the other's hand or even that much about honor placement. I know that camouflage during the bidding can be helpful to keep the defense from knowing what to do, but here we carry it too far.

On this actual hand, I see very little wrong with 2NT over 2 and if I was playing 2 as a nebulous I am good for 1NT rather than impossible 2, I think I would have just raised to 3.

Anyway, it looks like philking plays the 2 as promising clubs which explains his shortcut auction. The only problem with that is responder might have xxx and you lose the first three tricks, which is why some exploration is helpful.
--Ben--

Page 1 of 1


Fast Reply

  

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users