BBO Discussion Forums: Another case of "dealing with preempt" - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Another case of "dealing with preempt"

#1 User is offline   whereagles 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 14,900
  • Joined: 2004-May-11
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portugal
  • Interests:Everything!

Posted 2006-January-21, 00:13

IMP team match, intermediate pard, expert opps. You hold:

♠ Qxx
♥ Qxx
♦ Qxx
♣ ATxx

Pard RHO you
1♦* . 2♥ . ..?

*1♦ = natural or preparatory with 15-17 balanced

Pard would have opened 1♣ on a balanced 12-14, so, if he has a min, he has 5 diamonds (eventually 4 with 4441). Possible bids are:

pass
dbl, take-out
2NT, natural around 11-12
3♦, natural around 8-11. No clear agreements as to how many cards it shows.

Your bid?
0

#2 Guest_Jlall_*

  • Group: Guests

Posted 2006-January-21, 00:40

playing weak NT these hands are a problem. I would X and hope for teh best.
0

#3 User is offline   kenrexford 

  • Brain Farts and Actual Farts Increasing with Age
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 9,586
  • Joined: 2005-September-21
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Lima, Allen County, North-West-Central Ohio, USA
  • Interests:www.limadbc.blogspot.com editor/contributor

Posted 2006-January-21, 01:10

At IMP's, in practice I'd bid 3H, asking for a heart stop. I hope partner is 15-17 with Kx of hearts. If he is not, or lacks a heart stopper, this is a really bad board, probably. Hopefully we can figure out 9 tricks at 3S. LOL
"Gibberish in, gibberish out. A trial judge, three sets of lawyers, and now three appellate judges cannot agree on what this law means. And we ask police officers, prosecutors, defense lawyers, and citizens to enforce or abide by it? The legislature continues to write unreadable statutes. Gibberish should not be enforced as law."

-P.J. Painter.
0

#4 User is offline   mcphee 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,514
  • Joined: 2003-February-16

Posted 2006-January-21, 08:23

Double caters to most hands I think. I'd like a 4th S but what can you do.
0

#5 User is offline   hotShot 

  • Axxx Axx Axx Axx
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,976
  • Joined: 2003-August-31
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2006-January-21, 08:56

if 2NT does not promise a solid ♦ stopper, than i prefer 2NT.
Otherwise dbl is the bid of choice here.
0

#6 User is offline   awm 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 8,741
  • Joined: 2005-February-09
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Zurich, Switzerland

Posted 2006-January-21, 12:15

I'll try 3♦. If partner has a minimum, this will usually be an 8-card or more fit. If partner has the strong 1NT hand, he will make a move over this (since the raise shows 8-11 or thereabouts) and this should get us to 3NT.

The only really imaginable hand where 3♦ is not an 8 or more card fit and partner doesn't have the extras to move over it, partner has 4-1-4-4 shape (partner holding four hearts is tough to imagine). In this case the opponents have nine hearts, and may well "save" us from the seven card diamond fit.

Honestly I don't have that much experience playing weak NT except in the context of a strong club (or diamond) system. But it seems like raising partner's minor on three cards is probably often a good tactic when in doubt in these methods, since the probability of partner's five-card minor is much higher than in standard, and these bids conveniently show enough values to permit the strong notrumper to bid a game.
Adam W. Meyerson
a.k.a. Appeal Without Merit
0

#7 User is online   mikeh 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 14,037
  • Joined: 2005-June-15
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Canada
  • Interests:Bridge, golf, wine (red), cooking, reading eclectically but insatiably, travelling, making bad posts.

Posted 2006-January-21, 12:30

I don't understand the methods: this is not about weak notrumps: the weak notrump is opened 1♣ and the strong 1♦: were you guys playing Romex or something else with an artificial 1N?

As it is, I overbid with 2N. And change methods asap.
'one of the great markers of the advance of human kindness is the howls you will hear from the Men of God' Johann Hari
0

#8 User is offline   whereagles 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 14,900
  • Joined: 2004-May-11
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portugal
  • Interests:Everything!

Posted 2006-January-21, 13:21

1NT would be 9-11; that's why you open 12-14 and 15-17 with a preparatory 1♣ or 1♦. System is fine. You're just not used to it :)
0

#9 User is offline   Kalvan14 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 839
  • Joined: 2005-October-20

Posted 2006-January-22, 05:24

X and 3♦ show the right strength, and the wrong shape,
2N the right shape, and the wrong strength (would be an overbid).
I cannot convince myself to consider 3♥.
Overall, X is the least evil (hoping not to hear 4♠ from pard).
0

#10 User is offline   MickyB 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,290
  • Joined: 2004-May-03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, England

Posted 2006-January-22, 15:16

What Adam said - Have 3♦ require pard to bid 3NT with the balanced range.
0

#11 User is offline   Fluffy 

  • World International Master without a clue
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,404
  • Joined: 2003-November-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:madrid

Posted 2006-January-22, 17:22

I would double
BridgeGod: my personal website with interactive problems and articles
0

#12 User is offline   whereagles 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 14,900
  • Joined: 2004-May-11
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portugal
  • Interests:Everything!

Posted 2006-January-23, 04:13

Thx all. Hands were
Scoring: IMP

Pard RHO you
1♦ .. 2♥ .. ??

I believe the technically correct bid here is 3♦, as pard will pass on a 11-14 hand with 5 diamonds, or bid on to 3NT with a 15-17 hand. Double allows pard more rebids, but it can also lead to a hopeless spade contract. Hopeless and needless, as 3♦ is good enough to get you into the right spot.

Unfortunately, pard did have the worst-case-scenario hand. LHO bid 3♥ and pard, hoping for 4-5 diamonds across, bid to a bad 4♦ diamond contract. That was indeed a risk of 3♦, but since a 4441 hand is about 2%, I still think it's correct to bid 3♦.
0

#13 User is offline   Chamaco 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,909
  • Joined: 2003-December-02
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Rimini-Bologna (Italy)
  • Interests:Chess, Bridge, Jazz, European Cinema, Motorbiking, Tango dancing

Posted 2006-January-23, 06:29

whereagles, on Jan 23 2006, 10:13 AM, said:

Thx all. Hands were
Scoring: IMP

Pard RHO you
1♦ .. 2♥ .. ??

I don't understand, the original hand posted was

Qxx,Qxx,Qxx,ATxx

not

Qxx,Axx,Q9x,Qxxx

:)
"Bridge is like dance: technique's important but what really matters is not to step on partner's feet !"
0

#14 User is offline   whereagles 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 14,900
  • Joined: 2004-May-11
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portugal
  • Interests:Everything!

Posted 2006-January-23, 07:10

Oh, you're right. The original hand was misquoted. It was Qxx Axx Q9x Qxxx. Too many queens :rolleyes:

Still, I think it doesn't change the conclusion.
0
Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

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