[Free]

Indeed, West had ♠AJ so whenever you play for ♠A at your left side you win.

Scoring: IMP

---

At our table I didn't open with the East hand and opps only got to 4♠ by North after I intervened with 1♥ and partner supported. I lead ♣8. Now declarer gave me a 3 card ♠ with the J and let the 10 run! 4♠+1

I thought it was a nice game to see how inferences can make a difference in both bidding and play. If you see all 4 hands it looks like a silly game, but when you only see 1 in the bidding and 2 during the play it becomes interesting. At one table you place ♠A correct tnx to the weak two opening, at the other table you place it wrong because of a constructive-looking overcall.

[joshs]

Free, on Feb 20 2006, 06:50 AM, said:

Top competition of your country.

You hold:

Scoring: IMP

---

The bidding goes (starting on your right):
2♦* - pass - 2♠* - 3♦
3♥ - ...

2♦ = multi: weak in a Major or strong hands
2♠ = interest in ♥, to play when it's ♠

What do you bid now?

*Will be continued*

Well now I make a responsive x. This auction is identical to 2H-3D-3H-? If partner bids 3 spades, I have a close call between 3N, 4C and 4D next. Hopefully if I bid 3N the slow way, partner will know to not pass with a small stiff....

[han]

I think the 3S bid is AWFUL!!! Nothing good can come of this. If partner really has 5 spades then she will bid them over 3NT (or over a responsive double), if she has 3 (unlikely, admitted) or 4 then you don't want to play in spades on this hand.

The problem with supporting partner in a suit that she hasn't bid yet is that partner is not in on the joke. She will play you for 5 spades, and you usually and up too high. You were lucky that partner had the nuts (I wonder where I picked up that expression...).

[han]

I don't have a tv.. I must have been kibitzing a US junior player who constantly talks about the nuts. Who could it be??

[mikeh]

Hannie, on Feb 22 2006, 02:47 PM, said:

I think the 3S bid is AWFUL!!! Nothing good can come of this. If partner really has 5 spades then she will bid them over 3NT (or over a responsive double), if she has 3 (unlikely, admitted) or 4 then you don't want to play in spades on this hand.

I agree: 3♠ may seem like a master-bid, but it is a master-mind bid imho. Partnership bridge is about communication and trust: not about proving that one bidder is a superman/woman.

Bad bids sometimes work out. They remain bad bids.

Bad bids that work out are far more dangerous than those that fail, because we rationalize them as great strokes of deductive reasoning, and we will be ever more prone to make similar bad bids in the future. This leads competent partners and opps to form the (correct) opinion that we are undisciplined hero types who cannot be trusted to play sensibly. Our bad boards increase (as our 'master bids' fail) and we lament that we cannot get good games anymore.

One of my favourite bridge cartoons has a character saying to another: 'You're not good enough to be brilliant'. I always try to remember that when contemplating a master bid.

[benlessard]

3♠ bid will be punished once in a while like most unsound bid are so when its work its work that all .

On that deal we cant say 6s is a great contract. its was just a lucky deal


Ben

[EarlPurple]

Not sure 6♠ is such a great contract although it's probably better played by South as West is less likely to find a diamond lead from 4 small than East is from a singleton when West has the ace of spades (in which case 6♠ is beaten regardless of the position of the jack).

And if spades are 4-1 then you go down on a force.

So you need 3-2 spades and finding the jack, and diamonds 3-2 or if 4-1 then East to have ♠A