enough to double?
#2
Posted 2007-September-24, 05:50
#4
Posted 2007-September-24, 06:00
♠ Jx
♥ J10xx
♦ J10xx
♣ KQx
had been an auto double.
Roland
Sanity Check: Failure (Fluffy)
More system is not the answer...
#5
Posted 2007-September-24, 06:02
I may do it, but I would know, I am to light,
and the auction may turn out in a way, that
I may regret it. My partner still trusts me.
With kind regards
Marlowe
Uwe Gebhardt (P_Marlowe)
#6
Posted 2007-September-24, 06:31
#7
Posted 2007-September-24, 06:35
George Carlin
#8
Posted 2007-September-24, 10:00
Codo, on Sep 24 2007, 12:00 PM, said:
I though it was 8-10-12
#9
Posted 2007-September-24, 12:30
#10
Posted 2007-September-24, 12:40
Gerben42, on Sep 24 2007, 02:31 PM, said:
Agree with Gerben.
Harald
#11
Posted 2007-September-24, 16:29
- hrothgar
#12
Posted 2007-September-25, 04:08
whereagles, on Sep 24 2007, 08:30 PM, said:
I have a bunch of quarks and p will bid his hand himself.
#13
Posted 2007-September-25, 04:24
#15
Posted 2007-September-25, 09:06
cnszsun, on Sep 24 2007, 06:45 AM, said:
1♦-(2♠)-?
I wouldn't mind a double with more of a classic/true neg X shape, i.e.
xx J10xx J10x KQ10x
(a jack less even), as you can withstand with whatever partner does. I won't claim it to be the greatest negative double, but it would be tolerable.
This particular hand is both the wrong shape, and wrong count for the neg X, though. You will be poorly placed over a 3C call, and 3D will not be that great either.
So many experts, not enough X cards.
#16
Posted 2007-September-25, 09:17
PD is allowed to balance if we pass, or perhaps the opps get too high and I can take a whack at them in ♠.
Pass...not close to good enough to force PD to the 3 level by a direct negX.
.. neilkaz ..

Help

1♦-(2♠)-?