Page 1 of 1
6 5 come alive
#1
Posted 2008-July-07, 20:08
x
KQJTxx
x
JT9xx
1♠-p-2♦-?
all white imps
KQJTxx
x
JT9xx
1♠-p-2♦-?
all white imps
... and I can prove it with my usual, flawless logic.
George Carlin
George Carlin
#2
Posted 2008-July-07, 20:13
3♥
That's impossible. No one can give more than one hundred percent. By definition that is the most anyone can give.
#4
Posted 2008-July-10, 05:58
Well this seems like it should be a 2NT bid, with partnership agreement.
Reason: They have shown 23points between them. . do you really a bid that shows 15-17 balanced against that? If you decide no, than you can use 2NT as a bid forcing p to choose between the other two suits. (Incidentally, you should have an agreement for what cuebids of their suits mean. . . you may wish to play them "unusual vs. unusual" style, where cuebidding their top suit shows a strong hand in the highest unbid suit and cuebidding their bottom suit shows a strong hand in their lowest suit. This only works if both opponents bids show 4+ cards. If the opening bid is one of a minor, I would play they have only shown responders suit, as openers suit may be 3 or even 2 cards. IN this situation I play cuebid of responders suit is michael's, bidding openers suit is natural.) But undiscussed, 3H or even double seems reasonable as you'd like to hear which suit P likes, but 3H is more preemptive so I'd go with that.
But it is dangerous to play a non-jump 2NT as unusual with a p you do not know, so undiscussed I would probably bid 3H, but double also seems reasonable.
Reason: They have shown 23points between them. . do you really a bid that shows 15-17 balanced against that? If you decide no, than you can use 2NT as a bid forcing p to choose between the other two suits. (Incidentally, you should have an agreement for what cuebids of their suits mean. . . you may wish to play them "unusual vs. unusual" style, where cuebidding their top suit shows a strong hand in the highest unbid suit and cuebidding their bottom suit shows a strong hand in their lowest suit. This only works if both opponents bids show 4+ cards. If the opening bid is one of a minor, I would play they have only shown responders suit, as openers suit may be 3 or even 2 cards. IN this situation I play cuebid of responders suit is michael's, bidding openers suit is natural.) But undiscussed, 3H or even double seems reasonable as you'd like to hear which suit P likes, but 3H is more preemptive so I'd go with that.
But it is dangerous to play a non-jump 2NT as unusual with a p you do not know, so undiscussed I would probably bid 3H, but double also seems reasonable.
#6
Posted 2008-July-10, 07:03
Well I am sure 3 is enough but 4 is hanging neck right out there, forgive me for sin great shuffler, I have seen minus 800 before.
#7
Posted 2008-July-10, 07:54
Jlall, on Jul 10 2008, 07:02 AM, said:
wat?
learning Dutch Justin?
Please note: I am interested in boring, bog standard, 2/1.
- hrothgar
- hrothgar
#8
Posted 2008-July-10, 10:49
analysismi, on Jul 10 2008, 06:58 AM, said:
Well this seems like it should be a 2NT bid, with partnership agreement.
Uh, I have 6 hearts in a pretty much self-sufficient suit, and 5 fairly rotten clubs.
If I had
x
JT9xx
x
KQJTxx
I might consider a two-suit bid, since the default should be that the minor is better than the major.
I prefer a cue-bid for my two-suit bids myself (2♠ or 3♦). Not like I'll need 2♠ for a natural call, ever.
#10
Posted 2008-July-11, 03:52
jtfanclub, on Jul 10 2008, 06:49 PM, said:
analysismi, on Jul 10 2008, 06:58 AM, said:
Well this seems like it should be a 2NT bid, with partnership agreement.
Uh, I have 6 hearts in a pretty much self-sufficient suit, and 5 fairly rotten clubs.
If I had
x
JT9xx
x
KQJTxx
I might consider a two-suit bid, since the default should be that the minor is better than the major.
I prefer a cue-bid for my two-suit bids myself (2♠ or 3♦). Not like I'll need 2♠ for a natural call, ever.
but you'll need a natural 2NT?
... and I can prove it with my usual, flawless logic.
George Carlin
George Carlin
Page 1 of 1

Help
