You're not playing anything very sophisticated. You can check back for three-card support, or for four hearts, but you can't consult partner about the best strain. What would you do?
Best game
#1
Posted 2008-August-19, 09:01
You're not playing anything very sophisticated. You can check back for three-card support, or for four hearts, but you can't consult partner about the best strain. What would you do?
#2
Posted 2008-August-19, 09:08
Nothing fancy here, but its the only logical meaning of this sequence.
If I have used up my ration of bids and I can take only one call at this juncture it would be 3N.
#3
Posted 2008-August-19, 09:24
I'm not going to do anything fancy... if pard shows me 3 card support, I'm playing in 4♠.
#4
Posted 2008-August-19, 09:45
brianshark, on Aug 19 2008, 07:24 AM, said:
I'm not going to do anything fancy... if pard shows me 3 card support, I'm playing in 4♠.
1♣ - 1♠ - 1N - 2♦ - 2♥ - 3N. Why did I check back? Clearly I have 5 spades. Pard can choose. What I can't do is confirm a 5-3 fit AND let pard choose between 3N / 4♠.
1♣ - 1♠ - 1N - 2♦ - 2♠ - 3N. Why did I bid 3N? Because I had 4-4 in the majors? No, this hand bids 1♥, not 1♠. Therefore, this must be a COG.
#6
Posted 2008-August-19, 09:49
pclayton, on Aug 19 2008, 09:45 AM, said:
brianshark, on Aug 19 2008, 07:24 AM, said:
I'm not going to do anything fancy... if pard shows me 3 card support, I'm playing in 4♠.
1♣ - 1♠ - 1N - 2♦ - 2♥ - 3N. Why did I check back? Clearly I have 5 spades. Pard can choose. What I can't do is confirm a 5-3 fit AND let pard choose between 3N / 4♠.
1♣ - 1♠ - 1N - 2♦ - 2♠ - 3N. Why did I bid 3N? Because I had 4-4 in the majors? No, this hand bids 1♥, not 1♠. Therefore, this must be a COG.
Why can't these sequences be hands with four or five clubs that would be interested in slam if partner answers 3♣ to the checkback?
#7
Posted 2008-August-19, 09:54
cherdano, on Aug 19 2008, 07:49 AM, said:
pclayton, on Aug 19 2008, 09:45 AM, said:
brianshark, on Aug 19 2008, 07:24 AM, said:
I'm not going to do anything fancy... if pard shows me 3 card support, I'm playing in 4♠.
1♣ - 1♠ - 1N - 2♦ - 2♥ - 3N. Why did I check back? Clearly I have 5 spades. Pard can choose. What I can't do is confirm a 5-3 fit AND let pard choose between 3N / 4♠.
1♣ - 1♠ - 1N - 2♦ - 2♠ - 3N. Why did I bid 3N? Because I had 4-4 in the majors? No, this hand bids 1♥, not 1♠. Therefore, this must be a COG.
Why can't these sequences be hands with four or five clubs that would be interested in slam if partner answers 3♣ to the checkback?
How often does pard bid 3♣ over 2♦? Maybe 5%?
I think a responding hand fishing for a club slam tries 3♣ over 2M.
#8
Posted 2008-August-19, 10:00
#9
Posted 2008-August-19, 10:10
gnasher, on Aug 19 2008, 04:01 PM, said:
Pass 1♣ Pass 1♠
Pass 1NT Pass
You're not playing anything very sophisticated. You can check back for three-card support, or for four hearts, but you can't consult partner about the best strain. What would you do?
Assuming you are playing normal- (English-style) checkback methods, then because you responded a spade, checking back then bidding 3NT will always imply choice of games as pclayton said.
Anyway, I can't give an unbiased answer because I know the hand, but I had a conversation with my partner about this deal along the lines of
me: I think it's often right to play the 5-3 fit here
him: I think in the long run it's so close that it doesn't matter and I wouldn't get excited about it either way
(after we overheard a big telling off from the next table when the selected game went off with the other possible one making)
#10
Posted 2008-August-19, 10:20
Jlall, on Aug 19 2008, 10:47 AM, said:
I've still had terrible luck my whole life doing this, so I'm gonna stay simple and check for a fit.
#11
Posted 2008-August-19, 10:23
FrancesHinden, on Aug 19 2008, 05:10 PM, said:
Apparently not that normal. As I understand it, neither my teammates nor the opposition at my table had that agreement.
#12
Posted 2008-August-19, 10:29
gnasher, on Aug 19 2008, 05:23 PM, said:
FrancesHinden, on Aug 19 2008, 05:10 PM, said:
Apparently not that normal. As I understand it, neither my teammates nor the opposition at my table had that agreement.
It's not a specific agreement, it's a deduction.
'Normal' (English-style) checkback is that you bid 2c asking opener to bid 2H with 4 hearts, 2S with 3 spades and 2D with neither, with no other call possible.
As you cannot be 4-4 in the majors, if you checkback and then bid 3NT over the answer, you MUST have a 5-card major and have been interested in a fit. (At, least on the assumption that if you have a 4-4 heart fit you will always want to play in it).
Depending on what opener bids with 3-4 in the majors, you may think that ....2H - 3NT demands that opener pulls with 3-card spade support.
#13
Posted 2008-August-19, 10:40
pclayton, on Aug 19 2008, 10:54 AM, said:
cherdano, on Aug 19 2008, 07:49 AM, said:
pclayton, on Aug 19 2008, 09:45 AM, said:
brianshark, on Aug 19 2008, 07:24 AM, said:
I'm not going to do anything fancy... if pard shows me 3 card support, I'm playing in 4♠.
1♣ - 1♠ - 1N - 2♦ - 2♥ - 3N. Why did I check back? Clearly I have 5 spades. Pard can choose. What I can't do is confirm a 5-3 fit AND let pard choose between 3N / 4♠.
1♣ - 1♠ - 1N - 2♦ - 2♠ - 3N. Why did I bid 3N? Because I had 4-4 in the majors? No, this hand bids 1♥, not 1♠. Therefore, this must be a COG.
Why can't these sequences be hands with four or five clubs that would be interested in slam if partner answers 3♣ to the checkback?
How often does pard bid 3♣ over 2♦? Maybe 5%?
I think a responding hand fishing for a club slam tries 3♣ over 2M.
Why not bid 2♣ then 3NT to offer partner a choice, and use 2♦ to give him no choice? I mean this specifically for you two who I know play 2 way.
#14
Posted 2008-August-19, 10:42
pclayton, on Aug 19 2008, 10:08 AM, said:
Could be right. But if I had only one bid, it would be 4♠ - when two suits (hearts and diamonds) are potential weak spots in 3NT, and when my spades can survive a bad break, I'd abandon my principle of playing all hands in 3NT.
Still, don't mind using checkback and bidding 3NT over 2♥. That way, it won't so obviously be my fault as it would be if I made the wrong unilateral decision now. For well it was said by the bard:
When the One Great Scorer comes
To write against your name,
He marks not if you won or lost,
But how you placed the blame.
And sealed the Law by vote,
It little matters what they thought -
We hang for what they wrote.
#15
Posted 2008-August-19, 11:16
jdonn, on Aug 19 2008, 06:20 PM, said:
Jlall, on Aug 19 2008, 10:47 AM, said:
I've still had terrible luck my whole life doing this, so I'm gonna stay simple and check for a fit.
If I can unearth a 5-3 fit and still suggest 3nt, I will. If not, I stay simple like jdonn.
Do not underestimate the power of the dark side. Or the ninth trumph.
Best Regards Ole Berg
_____________________________________
We should always assume 2/1 unless otherwise stated, because:
- If the original poster didn't bother to state his system, that means that he thinks it's obvious what he's playing. The only people who think this are 2/1 players.
Gnasher
#16
Posted 2008-August-19, 12:29
I agree with JDonn. That analysis that shows it is 50-50 that a 5-3 fit or 3N is better is for everybody else. For me, it is 90% that 4S makes more tricks on a 5-3 fit when I bid 3N.
#17
Posted 2008-August-19, 12:39
jdonn, on Aug 19 2008, 10:40 AM, said:
I play that, but I thought we were discussing what to expect when "you aren't playing anything very sophisticated, checkback ...".
If I had a game forcing checkback with no further discussion I would just bid checkback, 2S over 2H, then 3N next, or 3S over 2S and pass 3N. (That's assuming I am not playing with Rexford, of course.)
Pass 1♣ Pass 1♠
Pass 1NT Pass