tough decision
#2
Posted 2007-December-04, 04:06
#5
Posted 2007-December-04, 12:39
If not gambling, I'd try 4♠ and hope this is forcing.
#6
Posted 2007-December-04, 12:41
#7
Posted 2007-December-04, 13:44
jdonn, on Dec 4 2007, 02:41 PM, said:
Exactly.
#8
Posted 2007-December-04, 14:11
jdonn, on Dec 4 2007, 01:41 PM, said:
Well, if partner thinks it is non-forcing and that 3♣ described his hand (and I know that not all agree that it shows a solid club suit with pointed suit stoppers), he may pass when we are cold for slam. Maybe he shouldn't, but 'not caring' seems a little blase (sorry, I can't put the accent on the e in blase).
But I bid 4♠ as well: it must logically be unpassable (and thus forcing
If I were worried that partner might pass, I'd bid 4♣ to make sure that we didn't reach 6♣ off two aces.
Edit: I didn't really mean 'off two aces'.. no way are we missing the club Ace, but we may have grand and we may not make small (altho I'd bet we would opposite my 3N bids), so I'd go slow on general principles if I thought he'd pass 4♠
#9
Posted 2007-December-04, 14:14
#10 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2007-December-04, 15:22
#11
Posted 2007-December-04, 16:15
If partner has 8 solid clubs and a side card, we have either 11 or 12 tricks depending on what the side card is. Let's clue partner in on what we have.
Jumping to 6♣ is too unilateral. There are aspects of partner's hand that only he knows - the distribution and high cards in the side suits. He is in a better position to make the final decision on the hand.
#12
Posted 2007-December-04, 17:17
#13
Posted 2007-December-04, 20:58
#14
Posted 2007-December-05, 07:17
Possible opener hand - Kx/xx/AKQx/AKQxx.
6NT prevent from possible major ruff in another major contract at level 6.
#15
Posted 2007-December-05, 08:44
#16
Posted 2007-December-05, 09:18
Raivis, on Dec 5 2007, 03:17 PM, said:
If you open this 1♣ you have a ( game? ) forcing reverse 2♦. There is no need to jump to 3NT.
Isn't it std to open this 1♦ because you have 4 of them?
I've seen a lot of 2♣ bids with this shape and strength.
I don't think this is a possible hand.
#17
Posted 2007-December-05, 10:04
hotShot, on Dec 5 2007, 10:18 AM, said:
Raivis, on Dec 5 2007, 03:17 PM, said:
If you open this 1♣ you have a ( game? ) forcing reverse 2♦. There is no need to jump to 3NT.
Isn't it std to open this 1♦ because you have 4 of them?
I've seen a lot of 2♣ bids with this shape and strength.
I don't think this is a possible hand.
It is certainly not standard to open this kind of hand (or any hand with reverse values) in the shorter suit. There are the two schools of thought re the correct opening with a generic normal opening hand with 4=5 in the minors. While traditionally this was a 1♦ opener, and still is for many players, there is a substantial school that opens 1♣ unless the suit disparity is truly great (AKQx Jxxxx as an example). But no-one opens 1♦ with reverse values, since to do so means distorting your hand (do you jumpshift into 3♣ next?) while opening 1♣ allows an easy descriptive sequence.
But I agree that no good player would hold the given hand for 1♣ then 3N.
#18
Posted 2007-December-05, 13:45
beatrix45, on Dec 5 2007, 02:58 AM, said:
Perfect reading!
Partner held ♠Kx ♥Jx ♦xx ♣AKQxxxx
We ended up playing 3NT wich went 2 quick off, while there was slam on 3 strains (Everything onside)
#19
Posted 2007-December-05, 23:49
Fluffy, on Dec 5 2007, 02:45 PM, said:
beatrix45, on Dec 5 2007, 02:58 AM, said:
Perfect reading!
Partner held ♠Kx ♥Jx ♦xx ♣AKQxxxx
We ended up playing 3NT wich went 2 quick off, while there was slam on 3 strains (Everything onside)
One comment - unbelieveable 3NT bid!
#20
Posted 2007-December-06, 00:06
Fluffy, on Dec 5 2007, 02:45 PM, said:
beatrix45, on Dec 5 2007, 02:58 AM, said:
Perfect reading!
Partner held ♠Kx ♥Jx ♦xx ♣AKQxxxx
We ended up playing 3NT wich went 2 quick off, while there was slam on 3 strains (Everything onside)
So what was the point of this post? To show that your partner is either an idiot or simply profoundly ignorant?

Help
