Help
Page 1 of 1
Re-Open? Do you act, red at imps?
#1
- Limit bidder
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 8,483
- Joined: 2004-November-02
- Gender:Female
- Location:England
- Interests:Bridge, classical music, skiing... but I spend more time earning a living than doing any of those
Posted 2006-March-06, 10:01
#2
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 9,151
- Joined: 2003-June-11
- Location:Southern California
Posted 2006-March-06, 10:07
4♦.
Pard has a decent hand but couldn't take a call over 3♠; can't I hope for: QJxx, x, Axxx, AQxx?
White on red I would have found a 3♦ call initially.
Pard has a decent hand but couldn't take a call over 3♠; can't I hope for: QJxx, x, Axxx, AQxx?
White on red I would have found a 3♦ call initially.
"Phil" on BBO
#3 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2006-March-06, 10:07
I voted for pass, too weak to act. If I X, I'm too afraid partner will sit expecting a big number only to be disappointed, I'm not really that eager to be in 4H either. Bidding is not crazy though.
#4
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 2,143
- Joined: 2003-May-02
- Location:Buenos Aires, Argentina
Posted 2006-March-06, 10:26
Pass I like to avoid disaster
The legend of the black octogon.
#5
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 14,900
- Joined: 2004-May-11
- Gender:Male
- Location:Portugal
- Interests:Everything!
Posted 2006-March-06, 10:35
Pard is marked with 13-15 or so. He didn't bid because he has spade lenght, which is quite plausible. Points break 20-20 and I have a void in their suit. I sure am bidding something here..
Double seems the best bid here, intending to convert 4♣ to 4♦. This pull-out is reasonable because pard can't have a 1-suiter. With a suit, spade lenght and fair hand, he would have already bid something over 3♠.
Double seems the best bid here, intending to convert 4♣ to 4♦. This pull-out is reasonable because pard can't have a 1-suiter. With a suit, spade lenght and fair hand, he would have already bid something over 3♠.
#6
- World International Master without a clue
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 17,404
- Joined: 2003-November-13
- Gender:Male
- Location:madrid
Posted 2006-March-06, 13:16
pass, might had bid 3♦ before.
#7
- Group: FD TEAM
- Posts: 2,735
- Joined: 2003-February-13
- Gender:Male
- Location:Nashville, TN
- Interests:Motorsports, cricket, disc golf, and of course - bridge. :-)
Posted 2006-March-06, 14:41
If you don't bid 3♦ before, you definitely can't now reenter the auction.
"Champions aren't made in gyms, champions are made from something they have deep inside them - a desire, a dream, a vision. They have to have last-minute stamina, they have to be a little faster, they have to have the skill and the will. But the will must be stronger than the skill. " - M. Ali
#8
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 14,038
- Joined: 2005-June-15
- Gender:Male
- Location:Canada
- Interests:Bridge, golf, wine (red), cooking, reading eclectically but insatiably, travelling, making bad posts.
Posted 2006-March-06, 15:21
I pass, but I am innately conservative by today's standards.
My concern is that partner will normally hold 4 ♠ and there is no reason to assume that:
1) they are making 3♠
2) we are making our contract
3) we can reach and stop in our best spot
If they are failing in 3♠ (and why not?), then what are we gaining by trying to score 130 in ♦. I'll spot you that imp in exchange for avoiding disaster.
Why are we going to make 4♦? Don't we have a lot of losers, or is that my imagination? Why does partner have to hold 3+♦? And if he is short in ♦, our defence goes up and our offence down.
If we can make 4♦, just maybe partner will bid 5. Now, if he does so, we may well have a play, to the point that this is not really a negative.
BTW, I have assumed that we were balancing with 4♦. Double is suicidal/fraticidal.... what are YOU leading after double, and 3N (intending to correct 4♣ to 4♦) is gambling that partner, with say 4=4=1=4 doesn't bless you for showing both minors and leaps to 5♣.
My concern is that partner will normally hold 4 ♠ and there is no reason to assume that:
1) they are making 3♠
2) we are making our contract
3) we can reach and stop in our best spot
If they are failing in 3♠ (and why not?), then what are we gaining by trying to score 130 in ♦. I'll spot you that imp in exchange for avoiding disaster.
Why are we going to make 4♦? Don't we have a lot of losers, or is that my imagination? Why does partner have to hold 3+♦? And if he is short in ♦, our defence goes up and our offence down.
If we can make 4♦, just maybe partner will bid 5. Now, if he does so, we may well have a play, to the point that this is not really a negative.
BTW, I have assumed that we were balancing with 4♦. Double is suicidal/fraticidal.... what are YOU leading after double, and 3N (intending to correct 4♣ to 4♦) is gambling that partner, with say 4=4=1=4 doesn't bless you for showing both minors and leaps to 5♣.
'one of the great markers of the advance of human kindness is the howls you will hear from the Men of God' Johann Hari
#9
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 6,951
- Joined: 2003-September-07
- Gender:Male
- Interests:Bridge, poker, politics
Posted 2006-March-06, 15:22
pass 
"Paul Krugman is a stupid person's idea of what a smart person sounds like." Newt Gingrich (paraphrased)
#10
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 6,080
- Joined: 2005-May-16
- Gender:Male
Posted 2006-March-06, 15:47
Throwing caution to the wind, does the LOTT, such as it is, not indicate that we have a 9+8 situation here? (At worst.) If we go down 2 doubled in 4 of a red suit (-300) when they are making 140, so be it. If pard has more in D then -100 is ok and making doubled is a possibility. Sometimes the 1S bidder won't double because he thinks that it is your hand (which it may well be...)
The Grand Design, reflected in the face of Chaos...it's a fluke!
#11
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 839
- Joined: 2005-October-20
Posted 2006-March-06, 18:51
I would have much preferred 3♦ at 1st opportunity.
I do not feel up to doubling (no defense, and the 5432 suit in hearts is not encouraging). And if I've to bid 4♦ now, I should have introduced my suit earlier.
I do not feel up to doubling (no defense, and the 5432 suit in hearts is not encouraging). And if I've to bid 4♦ now, I should have introduced my suit earlier.
#12
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 1,427
- Joined: 2005-August-12
- Gender:Male
-
Interests:Economics
Finance
Bridge bidding theory
Cooking
Downhill skiing
Posted 2006-March-06, 19:56
PASS. I'm not risking life an limb to save against -140.
#13
- Limit bidder
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 8,483
- Joined: 2004-November-02
- Gender:Female
- Location:England
- Interests:Bridge, classical music, skiing... but I spend more time earning a living than doing any of those
Posted 2006-March-08, 08:47
I would have passed out 3S.
Tom Townsend (a better player than I am, but I can still beat him at arm wrestling) doubled in the pass out seat. That resulted in an easy +600 in 5D (bidding diamonds at any time has the same effect, unless you tried 3D on the first round which on a bad day would end in 6D-1). Partner has a 3244 16-count.
Tom Townsend (a better player than I am, but I can still beat him at arm wrestling) doubled in the pass out seat. That resulted in an easy +600 in 5D (bidding diamonds at any time has the same effect, unless you tried 3D on the first round which on a bad day would end in 6D-1). Partner has a 3244 16-count.
Page 1 of 1
(1S) P (3S) P
(P) ?
3S pre-emptive