Page 1 of 1
Lead?
#1
Posted 2007-December-04, 16:27
Hi,
you play a base system similar to SAYC,
i.e. 15-17 NT, a 2/1 bid promising another bid
you hold in 3rd seat, at equal vul, MP scoring:
109x
Q9x
K10987x
10
1S ..... - (2C) - 2H (1) - (3C)
3H (2) - (4C) - Pass . - (Pass)
X ....... - all Pass
(1) contructive raise, (+7) - (-11)
(2) game try with heart values
Your lead, and more important, why?
If you have comments about the auction feel free
to make them.
With kind regards
Marlowe
Edited: The vulnerability was all green.
you play a base system similar to SAYC,
i.e. 15-17 NT, a 2/1 bid promising another bid
you hold in 3rd seat, at equal vul, MP scoring:
109x
Q9x
K10987x
10
1S ..... - (2C) - 2H (1) - (3C)
3H (2) - (4C) - Pass . - (Pass)
X ....... - all Pass
(1) contructive raise, (+7) - (-11)
(2) game try with heart values
Your lead, and more important, why?
If you have comments about the auction feel free
to make them.
With kind regards
Marlowe
Edited: The vulnerability was all green.
With kind regards
Uwe Gebhardt (P_Marlowe)
Uwe Gebhardt (P_Marlowe)
#2
Posted 2007-December-04, 16:59
Isn't the point of this constructive raise agreement to differentiate between a "good" raise to 2♠ and a bad one? Seems like you are just bidding 2♥ on all hands that would normally bid 2♠.
Anyway I'd have just raised to 2♠ on this hand, but you're clearly close to your bid, as you've described it. I'm not sure I'd have sat for the double of 4♣ either...but again I don't think it's clear cut and don't have a big problem with the pass.
As for the defense, I'd just go with the normal looking ♠10 lead.
Anyway I'd have just raised to 2♠ on this hand, but you're clearly close to your bid, as you've described it. I'm not sure I'd have sat for the double of 4♣ either...but again I don't think it's clear cut and don't have a big problem with the pass.
As for the defense, I'd just go with the normal looking ♠10 lead.
#3
Posted 2007-December-04, 17:23
I'd lead a club.
How are opponents going to take tricks on this hand? It seems unlikely they will take very many spade tricks (the suit we have bid and raised) and partner has advertised heart values with me holding the queen. My diamond holding (length and good spots) is such that they aren't likely to be pitching losers on their diamonds. So it seems like they will take tricks by scoring as many trumps as possible separately. May as well lead trumps while we have the tempo.
How are opponents going to take tricks on this hand? It seems unlikely they will take very many spade tricks (the suit we have bid and raised) and partner has advertised heart values with me holding the queen. My diamond holding (length and good spots) is such that they aren't likely to be pitching losers on their diamonds. So it seems like they will take tricks by scoring as many trumps as possible separately. May as well lead trumps while we have the tempo.
Adam W. Meyerson
a.k.a. Appeal Without Merit
a.k.a. Appeal Without Merit
#4
Posted 2007-December-04, 17:46
I think this is a clear game bid over 4♣. We have Q9x of the suit partner wants, and singleton in the suit the opponents are bidding.
I think I agree with the club lead in the given situation. Hard to see where else their tricks will come from.
I think I agree with the club lead in the given situation. Hard to see where else their tricks will come from.
Please let me know about any questions or interest or bug reports about GIB.
#5
Posted 2007-December-04, 22:55
This hand rates to be a constructive raise for me. The stiff ♣ definitely puts the hand into the "constructive range." For me 2♠ would show 3 card support and shape and very few points or 4-6 dummy points balanced and support.
Personally, I am not married to 4♠. The stiff ♣ is great but my trumps are not and the ♥Q9x is not quite enough to accept imho.
Personally, I am not married to 4♠. The stiff ♣ is great but my trumps are not and the ♥Q9x is not quite enough to accept imho.
Lord, help me choose the words I use and make them short and sweet.
We never know from day to day which ones we'll have to eat.
We never know from day to day which ones we'll have to eat.
#6
Posted 2007-December-05, 03:57
I thought this was a lead problem, not a bidding problem...
Anyway, I'll lead the ♥Q to take a peek at dummy while (hopefully) retaining the lead.
Anyway, I'll lead the ♥Q to take a peek at dummy while (hopefully) retaining the lead.
#7
Posted 2007-December-05, 04:13
Well I don't think this is a constructive raise, and I agree that over 4C I would have bid 4S as the bidding went. However, being in this situation now, I would lead the CT. Why? Cut down on ruffing value. As Josh and Adam state, from where are their tricks coming?
"The King of Hearts a broadsword bears, the Queen of Hearts a rose." W. H. Auden.
#8
Posted 2007-December-05, 10:25
whereagles, on Dec 5 2007, 04:57 AM, said:
I thought this was a lead problem, not a bidding problem...
P_Marlowe, on Dec 4 2007, 05:27 PM, said:
If you have comments about the auction feel free
to make them.
to make them.
Please let me know about any questions or interest or bug reports about GIB.
#9
Posted 2007-December-07, 00:46
P_Marlowe, on Dec 4 2007, 05:27 PM, said:
you play a base system similar to SAYC, i.e. 15-17 NT, a 2/1 bid promising another bid. You hold in 3rd seat, all green, MP scoring:
♠ T9x ♥ Q9x ♦ KT987x ♣ T
1♠ (2♣) 2♥ (3♣)
3♥ (4♣) _P (_P)
_X AP
- 2♥ = contructive raise, (+7) - (-11)
- 3♥ = game try with heart values
Your lead, and more important, why? If you have comments about the auction feel free to make them.
♠ T9x ♥ Q9x ♦ KT987x ♣ T
1♠ (2♣) 2♥ (3♣)
3♥ (4♣) _P (_P)
_X AP
- 2♥ = contructive raise, (+7) - (-11)
- 3♥ = game try with heart values
Your lead, and more important, why? If you have comments about the auction feel free to make them.
Prefer 2♠ to 2♥. Prefer 4♦ or 4♠ to _P. Now, IMO ♣ = 10, ♥ = 7, ♠ = 6.
We seem to have the side suits tied up, so our best hope is to prevent our winners being ruffed.
Page 1 of 1

Help
