slam suitable min
#1 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2007-May-21, 12:49
1) What do you bid?
2) Do you agree with 1N rather than 2D?
#2
Posted 2007-May-21, 12:56
I guess if 1♥ was my style (it is not), I would know what 1♠ promised besides natural and 1NT force. For example, how would 1♠ differ from 2♠, and what other option did partner have to the natural and invitiation 4NT. Does partner need 5+♦ for this auction? How "light" can I be for this auction. Would a shapely 10 hcp count? Do I only open some 11 counts when balanced?
I guess we could play with the constraints such that I might try for slam wiht this hand, but realistically, at the table after 4NT on this auction, I am done.
#3
Posted 2007-May-21, 12:58
I agree with 1N as it's the best description of my hand.
#4
Posted 2007-May-21, 13:05
2) I agree with 1NT, 2♦ should show an unbalanced hand (1435, 1444)
#6
Posted 2007-May-21, 13:52
1) pass, you have a nice hand, but sometimes
you also need the power
2) I agree, but it is not worth much, I am quite old fashioned
With kind regards
Marlowe
Uwe Gebhardt (P_Marlowe)
#7
Posted 2007-May-21, 14:13
I pass now. Yes, this is a suitable minimum but I don't think it is an exceptional minimum.
- hrothgar
#8
Posted 2007-May-21, 14:30
BebopKid (Bryan Lee Williams)
"I've practiced meditation most of my life. It's better than sitting around doing nothing."
(Tom Sims, from topfive.com)
♦♦♦♦♦♦
#9
Posted 2007-May-21, 14:32
#10
Posted 2007-May-21, 14:39
Jlall, on May 21 2007, 01:49 PM, said:
1) What do you bid?
2) Do you agree with 1N rather than 2D?
I thought I read somewhere this week that some guy, Bart Bramley??, not sure who he is, suggests rebidding nt.
I think he said something along the lines of bid notrump as soon as possible on a balanced hand, especially with short honors. Investigation of suit contracts is on a firmer footing when partner knows my hand-type, both when he rebids notrump and when he does not.
p=p=1c=p
1h=??
9743....AKJ...Q7...A642
#11
Posted 2007-May-21, 14:44
#12
Posted 2007-May-21, 14:45
An important reason for the pass is that I only hold one working card in partner's suits..
I am assuming that we had ways to better describe distributional strong hands as responder, so I'm tending to think in terms of KQxx Qx AKQJx Jx as protoypical for his sequence....
So a minimum such as Ax K109x xxx KQ10x would be slam suitable..
If he is semi-balanced, he will need some tricks from my suits...even tho his hand will take the majority of the tricks.. and he will have shortness...so I can't count on him having the missing interior cards I need.
Sorry: a long-winded way of echoing the earlier posts
#13 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2007-May-21, 14:49
mike777, on May 21 2007, 03:39 PM, said:
Jlall, on May 21 2007, 01:49 PM, said:
1) What do you bid?
2) Do you agree with 1N rather than 2D?
I thought I read somewhere this week that some guy, Bart Bramley??, not sure who he is, suggests rebidding nt.
I think he said something along the lines of bid notrump as soon as possible on a balanced hand, especially with short honors. Investigation of suit contracts is on a firmer footing when partner knows my hand-type, both when he rebids notrump and when he does not.
p=p=1c=p
1h=??
9743....AKJ...Q7...A642
mike dont spam my threads with this garbage, I said I don't care what you feel about the choice to rebid 1H. That is our system. It was actually bart bramley who rebid 1H so thats what makes this so funny.
#14
Posted 2007-May-21, 15:01
Yes I thought it was funny, since Bart just wrote this, sorry my humor pissed you off but I thought it was a very valid point.
#16
Posted 2007-May-21, 15:42
Kx xxxx KJx AJxx
This is a "worse" hand by some measures, but the cards are all working and I'd feel compelled to try for 6♦. On the actual hand it's easy to imagine some of those kings and queens turning out worthless opposite shortness.
a.k.a. Appeal Without Merit
#18
Posted 2007-May-21, 16:04
#19 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2007-May-21, 16:09
#20
Posted 2007-May-21, 16:25
Jlall, on May 21 2007, 04:58 PM, said:
Wow... nice responder hand. 18 hcp, 8 controls, 38 ZAR points and your partner opened without 4♠. ZAR rules would say your partner needs at least 26 ZAR points in that case... and zar count is 26+38 = 64 ZAR points (62 needed for slam). This would suggest that 4NT was a "zar-underbid". Of course few use ZAR but at least he suggest that 4NT is an unbid.
What about openers hand. HE had 12 hcp, 4 controls, and 10 distributional ZAR points.. an absolute, total ZAR minimum opening bid of 26 ZAR points (zar advocates 25 as minimum when holding 4+spades). So from a zar perspective opener has a clear pass of the invite and responder is too strong to simply invite slam.
I find it hard to think Opener can be held responsible for passing this hand, but rather think the question is should responder just bid 6NT over 1NT, or investigate if 6♦ is a better contract. And in the second case, how.

Help
