Help
All red, IMPs
AJxx
Qx
Axxxx
xx
You're playing 14-16 NTs and partner opens a minor and rebids 1NT over our spade response, so he has less than a 14 count if balanced. Partner could have 14-15 if unbalanced with a singleton spade. Assume 1453 or 1444 is more likely than 1354 or 1345 if partner is unbalanced.
Is this worth an invite if:
1. Partner opened 1♣
2. Partner opened 1♦
3. Partner opened a Precision 1♦
Page 1 of 1
worth an invite?
#1
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 3,162
- Joined: 2006-July-10
- Gender:Male
- Location:Maryland
Posted 2008-February-08, 08:17
#2
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 15,725
- Joined: 2003-February-13
- Gender:Male
- Location:Natick, MA
-
Interests:Travel
Cooking
Brewing
Hiking
Posted 2008-February-08, 08:33
I would probably invite in all cases
11 opposite 11 gives us very good play for 2NT and this is a damn good 11.
I feel slightly more worried about inviting over a natural 1♦ opening. We have an 8+ card fit, which means that they rate to have one as well.
I can easily see us with enough strength for 3N, but the opponents having 5 cashing tricks in Hearts or Clubs off the top.
11 opposite 11 gives us very good play for 2NT and this is a damn good 11.
I feel slightly more worried about inviting over a natural 1♦ opening. We have an 8+ card fit, which means that they rate to have one as well.
I can easily see us with enough strength for 3N, but the opponents having 5 cashing tricks in Hearts or Clubs off the top.
Alderaan delenda est
#3
- Csaba the Hutt
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 13,027
- Joined: 2006-June-16
- Gender:Male
- Interests:bye
Posted 2008-February-08, 08:43
I'd invite over 1♦ and precision 1♦, but the last one is close I think.
... and I can prove it with my usual, flawless logic.
George Carlin
George Carlin
#4
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 1,962
- Joined: 2007-September-14
- Location:Australia
- Interests:The Universe, Traveling, Squash, and Scandinavia.
Posted 2008-February-08, 08:54
I'd invite in all 3 cases too. Nothing is stopping partner from having some intermediates. If partner opened 1D, I would invite and show diamonds whatever my method is (rather than bal invite)
- Andy -
We are all connected to each other biologically, to the Earth chemically, and to the rest of the universe atomically.
We're in the universe, and the universe is in us.
We are all connected to each other biologically, to the Earth chemically, and to the rest of the universe atomically.
We're in the universe, and the universe is in us.
#5
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 294
- Joined: 2005-October-21
- Gender:Male
- Location:South Sweden
-
Interests:Real name: Ulf Nilsson
Semi-pro player.
Posted 2008-February-08, 09:15
Pass. Heart queen and spade jack too soft.
"When I'm working on a problem, I never think about beauty. I think only how to solve the problem. But when I have finished, if the solution is not beautiful, I know it is wrong."
- R. Buckminster Fuller
- R. Buckminster Fuller
#6
- Limit bidder
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 8,483
- Joined: 2004-November-02
- Gender:Female
- Location:England
- Interests:Bridge, classical music, skiing... but I spend more time earning a living than doing any of those
Posted 2008-February-08, 09:48
this type of hand shows the problem with both not being able to raise diamonds on the first round and rebidding 1NT on unbalanced hands. If partner can have
x
Kxxx
Kxxxx
AKx
then we're playing our diamond slam in 1NT.
OK, that's possibly slightly carefully constructed, but many 1453s will make a large number of tricks in diamonds; you have to move with something to look for a diamond fit if that's a possible shape.
x
Kxxx
Kxxxx
AKx
then we're playing our diamond slam in 1NT.
OK, that's possibly slightly carefully constructed, but many 1453s will make a large number of tricks in diamonds; you have to move with something to look for a diamond fit if that's a possible shape.
#7
- Under bidder
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 11,797
- Joined: 2004-July-25
- Gender:Male
- Location:Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Posted 2008-February-08, 09:59
Over a 1D opener I would invite in diamonds. Over a 1C opener it is close.. I might pass.
Please note: I am interested in boring, bog standard, 2/1.
- hrothgar
- hrothgar
#8
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 3,937
- Joined: 2004-June-05
Posted 2008-February-08, 10:08
Quote
Is this worth an invite if:
1. Partner opened 1♣
2. Partner opened 1♦
3. Partner opened a Precision 1♦
1. Partner opened 1♣
2. Partner opened 1♦
3. Partner opened a Precision 1♦
For #1, I committed myself when I bid 1♠. If I didn't think I had enough to invite over 1NT, I shoulda bid 1♦.
For #2, heck ya. 3♦ should be safe, so I can invite with impunity.
For #3, I'd probably let it die. I don't have enough information. The good news is, since the opponents don't have enough information either, we may get a bonus trick or two from the defense.
#10
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 3,727
- Joined: 2006-June-05
- Location:Oslo, Norway
- Interests:Bridge, sports, Sci-fi, fantasy
Posted 2008-February-09, 01:15
Jlall, on Feb 8 2008, 05:25 PM, said:
I would invite opp all, inv in diamonds opp a 1D
Ditto.
Kind regards,
Harald
Harald
#11
- 5555
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 9,520
- Joined: 2003-September-04
- Gender:Male
Posted 2008-February-09, 12:37
FrancesHinden, on Feb 8 2008, 09:48 AM, said:
this type of hand shows the problem with both not being able to raise diamonds on the first round and rebidding 1NT on unbalanced hands. If partner can have
x
Kxxx
Kxxxx
AKx
then we're playing our diamond slam in 1NT.
OK, that's possibly slightly carefully constructed, but many 1453s will make a large number of tricks in diamonds; you have to move with something to look for a diamond fit if that's a possible shape.
x
Kxxx
Kxxxx
AKx
then we're playing our diamond slam in 1NT.
OK, that's possibly slightly carefully constructed, but many 1453s will make a large number of tricks in diamonds; you have to move with something to look for a diamond fit if that's a possible shape.
Well, if partner opened 1D, I would just always invite in diamonds. It won't be the end of the world to play in 3D rather than 1N opposite a balanced min with four diamonds. So while I agree there can be a problem, I don't think the actual hand is a good example for that.
The easiest way to count losers is to line up the people who talk about loser count, and count them. -Kieran Dyke
#12
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 3,162
- Joined: 2006-July-10
- Gender:Male
- Location:Maryland
Posted 2008-February-10, 12:13
Was from bidding practice. I don't remember partner's hand.
#13
- Limit bidder
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 8,483
- Joined: 2004-November-02
- Gender:Female
- Location:England
- Interests:Bridge, classical music, skiing... but I spend more time earning a living than doing any of those
Posted 2008-February-10, 16:41
cherdano, on Feb 9 2008, 07:37 PM, said:
FrancesHinden, on Feb 8 2008, 09:48 AM, said:
this type of hand shows the problem with both not being able to raise diamonds on the first round and rebidding 1NT on unbalanced hands. If partner can have
x
Kxxx
Kxxxx
AKx
then we're playing our diamond slam in 1NT.
OK, that's possibly slightly carefully constructed, but many 1453s will make a large number of tricks in diamonds; you have to move with something to look for a diamond fit if that's a possible shape.
x
Kxxx
Kxxxx
AKx
then we're playing our diamond slam in 1NT.
OK, that's possibly slightly carefully constructed, but many 1453s will make a large number of tricks in diamonds; you have to move with something to look for a diamond fit if that's a possible shape.
Well, if partner opened 1D, I would just always invite in diamonds. It won't be the end of the world to play in 3D rather than 1N opposite a balanced min with four diamonds. So while I agree there can be a problem, I don't think the actual hand is a good example for that.
Maybe I phrased myself badly. I concocted this hand to show that is really cannot possibly be right to pass 1NT if partner can have a hand looking like this.
Page 1 of 1