Slam?
#1
Posted 2008-November-14, 21:09
♠K9x
♥KJ98xx
♦AKx
♣x
1♣-1♥
2♠-3♦ (4SF)
3♠
Available agreements:
3N is to play
4♦ is kickback for clubs
4NT is RKC for ♠
#2
Posted 2008-November-14, 21:56
Why is 4♦ kickback for clubs? That is another bad agreement, the set of hands that would bid 4♦ keycard now without having bid 3♣ before is very small. This sort of auction is already hard enough without taking very useful bids and making them completely useless!
Anyway I would just bid keycard on the actual hand, but I think these methods are really poor.
#3
Posted 2008-November-14, 21:58
#4
Posted 2008-November-14, 22:14
#5
Posted 2008-November-14, 23:04
I mean, I would assume normal, but then there is no problem. Hence, this must be W.S. for there to be a problem.
-P.J. Painter.
#6
Posted 2008-November-15, 11:02
#7
Posted 2008-November-15, 11:37
peachy, on Nov 15 2008, 12:02 PM, said:
It might not be passed, but it will get you a director call.
#8
Posted 2008-November-15, 16:46
Now I KC for spades.
Oh by the way, if partner mada a joke with his 3 Spade bid, thinking he may stay below 3 NT with AQxx, Ax,xx,AKQJx, we will discuss this after he had made 6 Spade.
Roland
Sanity Check: Failure (Fluffy)
More system is not the answer...
#9
Posted 2008-November-15, 20:23
#10
Posted 2008-November-16, 00:25
TimG, on Nov 15 2008, 12:37 PM, said:
peachy, on Nov 15 2008, 12:02 PM, said:
It might not be passed, but it will get you a director call.
it was a typo...

Help
