[MickyB]

Scoring: IMP

RHO opens 1♥, playing 4 card majors and a 15-18 NT.

---

[Blofeld]

3♠.

I want to preempt on this hand. With the black suits the other way around I'd bid 2♥, but spades are spades are spades.

I'm 6-5. I have no defence. I have a ridiculously high ODR. The vulnerability is nasty, but I'm pushing this one for all it's worth anyway.

[Winstonm]

Blofeld, on Jan 22 2006, 09:15 PM, said:

3♠.

I want to preempt on this hand. With the black suits the other way around I'd bid 2♥, but spades are spades are spades.

I'm 6-5. I have no defence. I have a ridiculously high ODR. The vulnerability is nasty, but I'm pushing this one for all it's worth anyway.

I certainly admire the guts of this call but it is too rich for my blood at these colors. 1S is enough for me as I need a big boost from partner in one of my suits before this hand warrant serious thoughts.

Winston

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

assuming 2H is Michales, I bid that.
I have a hand that looks like a 2-suiter,
why not tell partner about it?

With kind regrads
Marlowe

[HeartA]

I think I would pass and come back later if there is chance.

[Free]

2♠

[mr1303]

Quote

3♠.

I want to preempt on this hand. With the black suits the other way around I'd bid 2♥, but spades are spades are spades.

I'm 6-5. I have no defence. I have a ridiculously high ODR. The vulnerability is nasty, but I'm pushing this one for all it's worth anyway

Yes Owen. And this is why people play penalty doubles against you....

I would pass. My suits are rubbish, and I am at RED

[whereagles]

2♥ michaels. I really fail to see wtp

[bearmum]

MickyB, on Jan 23 2006, 11:34 AM, said:

Scoring: IMP

RHO opens 1♥, playing 4 card majors and a 15-18 NT.

---

WOW u bid to THREE level at RED v white ------ I think you have a death wish (at white V red it's a better proposition IMHO)

BECAUSE
1. you haven't told P you have 2 suits
2. you have a 6 loser hand and you have NO idea what P has

with your hand I would
1. PASS or (If as you do figure I have a bid I would hopefully have Michaels -- or ONLY bid 2♠ --- and hope that W has insufficient in his hand to double for penalty(if indeed a X would be for penalty after a 2♠ overcall)

[Gerben42]

2♥: 5 - 5 ♠ + minor

either weak (here) or strong.

[MickyB]

mr1303, on Jan 23 2006, 09:41 AM, said:

Quote

3♠.

I want to preempt on this hand. With the black suits the other way around I'd bid 2♥, but spades are spades are spades.

I'm 6-5. I have no defence. I have a ridiculously high ODR. The vulnerability is nasty, but I'm pushing this one for all it's worth anyway

Yes Owen. And this is why people play penalty doubles against you....

I would pass. My suits are rubbish, and I am at RED

They are prepared to give up their chances of bidding constructively to the correct contract, in return for taking fewer penalties? Excellent

QJ9xxx doesn't look like a rubbish suit to me. Admittedly I'd like the 8 as well...

[luke warm]

3♣, hi/low

[MickyB]

My bid at the table was 3♠.

Pass will miss games and it will lose double part-score swings, unless you are prepared to come back in later. That's reasonable if pard will now expect 6x(5x) but it is also pretty dangerous to give the opps that much space before sticking your neck out.

1♠ could work out ok, but it is rather misleading - if partner has a decent hand you will never persuade him that you are a weak 6-5, if he has a poor hand then you may as well bid 2♠.

2♥ has the merit of describing your handtype to partner. However I don't think it will be right to play in clubs too often - You are expecting to get forced repeatedly, so you need the safety of the 6 card trump suit, and you will always need to contract for a trick more in clubs than in spades. If you were 6x5x there would be (slightly) more case for 2H, to give the partnership the option of competing in diamonds over the opponent's club bid. As it is, 2H makes the opponent's lives far too easy for my liking.

2♠ is worthy of consideration at this vulnerability - it is obviously safer than 3♠, but it will miss the occasional 4♠. I don't like making this bid when I would have done the same with QJ9xxx xx xx QJx, and I would certainly feel rather uncomfortable if the auction continued 3♥-3♠-4♥ back to me - I think 4♠ must be the percentage action here, but I hate taking the last guess.

So that left 3♠, risky for sure but with the potential to force a mistake in the bidding or in the play. I was slightly nervous when the auction continued pass-pass-double-all pass - partner tabled K KT97x AKx 98xx. The play went fairly well - the opps cleared clubs (breaking 2-2), the ten of trumps dropped doubleton and they misdefended to give me the 9th

[mr1303]

So you should've gone for -200 and quite possibly -500 with opponents able to make.... 2D?

Congratulations Mike, another bit of great bridge from you. My feelings are well and truly verified

[MickyB]

It always makes 8 tricks (there are 9 in ♣), opps can make 4♦ or 2NT and our teammates made 3NT. This is after partner has put down a stiff in my suit and a load of wasted values in the red suits.

[Blofeld]

mr1303, on Jan 23 2006, 04:41 AM, said:

Yes Owen. And this is why people play penalty doubles against you....

If the opponents are really playing penalty doubles I bid 3♠ without even the few qualms about the bid I otherwise have.

[pbleighton]

"2♥ michaels. I really fail to see wtp"

The problem is the sixth spade.

I think all of the alternatives are bad. I would bid 2S at this vulnerability, but I wouldn't argue strongly against any of the other choices (including 2H).

Peter

[han]

I dislike Michaels when I'm weak and my major is longer. Michaels makes it much easier for the opponents in the bidding, and they will get everything right in the play.

So I strongly prefer to bid a number of spades. 2S would be my choice, I don't have the stomach to bid 3S at these colors.

[Al_U_Card]

Lots of playing strength, no (little) defense, more spades than clubs, 2S wtp?