Help
2.
Scoring: IMP
1♦-(3♠)-?
1♦-(3♠)-?
Page 1 of 1
Two hands from club game
#1
- Group: Yellows
- Posts: 720
- Joined: 2004-January-06
- Location:CHINA
Posted 2007-October-27, 05:42
1.
2.
2.
Michael Sun
#2 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2007-October-27, 05:47
1) 3N, no reasonable alternative. If we don't bid it, we won't get there.
2) Tougher, if partner is 544 bidding 3N is a disaster but if he is 1444 3N is probably our best spot. I don't think of 3S as a punt here and think it is a natural bid. Some people (me) would rebid 1N with 1444 mins but that still leaves 1444 with some extras, though it makes 544 more likely. If your style is to bid this way with 1444 mins I would probably just bid 3N.
2) Tougher, if partner is 544 bidding 3N is a disaster but if he is 1444 3N is probably our best spot. I don't think of 3S as a punt here and think it is a natural bid. Some people (me) would rebid 1N with 1444 mins but that still leaves 1444 with some extras, though it makes 544 more likely. If your style is to bid this way with 1444 mins I would probably just bid 3N.
#3
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 750
- Joined: 2007-October-18
- Gender:Male
- Location:Netherlands
- Interests:Bridge, music, sports
Posted 2007-October-27, 06:16
1. 3NT, what else?
2. I don't like this auction, for 3NT the ♠A is too little unless there are 8 other tricks from top which is not what I expect at this point. For 5/6♦ the ♠A is ok but I would have preferred those 4 points in my partners colours. Anyway, i'll bid 4♦, but would not be surprised if 4♥ was the winner.
2. I don't like this auction, for 3NT the ♠A is too little unless there are 8 other tricks from top which is not what I expect at this point. For 5/6♦ the ♠A is ok but I would have preferred those 4 points in my partners colours. Anyway, i'll bid 4♦, but would not be surprised if 4♥ was the winner.
--
Finding your own mistakes is more productive than looking for partner's. It improves your game and is good for your soul. (Nige1)
Finding your own mistakes is more productive than looking for partner's. It improves your game and is good for your soul. (Nige1)
#4
- - - T98765432 AQT8
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 15,085
- Joined: 2005-June-23
- Gender:Male
- Location:Las Vegas, NV
Posted 2007-October-27, 09:35
1 - 3nt duh
2 - 4♦, If partner does anything but 5♦ then I'll probably bid 5NT and if he is 0445 he can choose clubs. 1444 does not worry me as I think that should rebid 1NT (among other problems, 1♦ 1♠ 2♣ can too easily lose a heart fit.) My real worry is 0445 when he is too weak for slam. Maybe 5♣ next shows that and I should pass.
Edit: I should mention I forgot about 1444 that is too good to rebid 1NT. Oh well I'll keep my answer, hopefully I can survive that hand.
2 - 4♦, If partner does anything but 5♦ then I'll probably bid 5NT and if he is 0445 he can choose clubs. 1444 does not worry me as I think that should rebid 1NT (among other problems, 1♦ 1♠ 2♣ can too easily lose a heart fit.) My real worry is 0445 when he is too weak for slam. Maybe 5♣ next shows that and I should pass.
Edit: I should mention I forgot about 1444 that is too good to rebid 1NT. Oh well I'll keep my answer, hopefully I can survive that hand.
Please let me know about any questions or interest or bug reports about GIB.
#5
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 7,786
- Joined: 2004-September-05
- Gender:Male
- Location:Galloway NJ USA
-
Interests:Bridge, Poker, participatory and spectator sports.
Occupation - Tax Attorney in Atlantic City, NJ.
Posted 2007-October-27, 09:41
1) 3NT is clear.
2) With 1-4-4-4, partner might have rebid 1NT rather than 2♣. He might be 1-4-4-4, but it is also possible that he is 0-4-5-4. Even if he is 1-4-4-4, a 3NT contract is no bargain (unless his singleton spade is the K).
Besides that, there is no reason to rule out a slam in diamonds.
I bid 4♦.
2) With 1-4-4-4, partner might have rebid 1NT rather than 2♣. He might be 1-4-4-4, but it is also possible that he is 0-4-5-4. Even if he is 1-4-4-4, a 3NT contract is no bargain (unless his singleton spade is the K).
Besides that, there is no reason to rule out a slam in diamonds.
I bid 4♦.
#6
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 4,531
- Joined: 2005-October-09
- Location:Netherlands
Posted 2007-October-27, 12:24
cnszsun, on Oct 27 2007, 06:42 AM, said:
1.
2.
Scoring: IMP
1♦-(3♠)-?
1♦-(3♠)-?
2.
Scoring: IMP
1♦-(3♠)-?
1♦-(3♠)-?
1) 3NT. Should we be in 4♥? Tough luck.
2) What is the use of bidding 2♥? If I bid 1♦-1♠; 2♣-3NT, I show 12-14 HCP, exactly 4 spades in a balanced hand and three hearts with a stopper or 2 hearts with an excellent stopper. 3NT promisses 4333, 4324 or 4234 distribution. Note that this bid also promisses at least six cards in the minors.
If I bid 2♥, I am showing either: additional strength or multiple places to play. I have neither.
As far as my own hand is concerned, it only want to suggest a 4-4 fit in spades or a no trump contract. If partner would have a hand with something like 65 in the minors, you will hear him after 3NT, given that 1♦-1♠; 2♣-3NT promisses 6 cards in the minors (since it denied 5 spades or 4 hearts).
Bidding 2♥ on hands like this is ignoring partner. You are trying to figure out what partner has to place the contract but overlook that you have an extremely descriptive bid available that makes it easy for partner to place the contract. Just make the descriptive bid and trust that partner will make the right decision.
Rik
I want my opponents to leave my table with a smile on their face and without matchpoints on their score card - in that order.
The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds the new discoveries, is not “Eureka!” (I found it!), but “That’s funny…” – Isaac Asimov
The only reason God did not put "Thou shalt mind thine own business" in the Ten Commandments was that He thought that it was too obvious to need stating. - Kenberg
The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds the new discoveries, is not “Eureka!” (I found it!), but “That’s funny…” – Isaac Asimov
The only reason God did not put "Thou shalt mind thine own business" in the Ten Commandments was that He thought that it was too obvious to need stating. - Kenberg
#7
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 9,151
- Joined: 2003-June-11
- Location:Southern California
Posted 2007-October-27, 12:28
1. 3N looks kind of obvious.
2. I love this hand opposite spade shortness. I wouldn't be surprised if 3N and 6♦ had roughly the same play. My only fear is that pard has a 1=3=4=5 and we get to the wrong spot. I'll start with 4♦.
2. I love this hand opposite spade shortness. I wouldn't be surprised if 3N and 6♦ had roughly the same play. My only fear is that pard has a 1=3=4=5 and we get to the wrong spot. I'll start with 4♦.
"Phil" on BBO
#8
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 6,373
- Joined: 2003-March-15
- Location:Hamburg, Germany
- Interests:games and sports, esp. bridge,chess and (beach-)volleyball
Posted 2007-October-29, 03:22
1. no brainer 3 NT
2. I agree that 2 ♥ was pointless and created the problems. Now I would go with 4 ♦.
2. I agree that 2 ♥ was pointless and created the problems. Now I would go with 4 ♦.
Kind Regards
Roland
Sanity Check: Failure (Fluffy)
More system is not the answer...
Roland
Sanity Check: Failure (Fluffy)
More system is not the answer...
Page 1 of 1
1♦-(3♠)-?