Hypothesis Testing xxx AKxxx Axxx Q
#1
Posted 2009-January-03, 13:04
♠xxx ♥AKxxx ♦Axxx ♣Q
a.k.a. Appeal Without Merit
#2
Posted 2009-January-03, 13:16
#4
Posted 2009-January-03, 17:16
But with a stiff Queen this hand is clearly below my standars to double, I would pass.
#5
Posted 2009-January-03, 17:33
#6
Posted 2009-January-03, 18:43
#7
Posted 2009-January-03, 19:35
#8
Posted 2009-January-03, 19:47
awm, on Jan 3 2009, 02:04 PM, said:
♠xxx ♥AKxxx ♦Axxx ♣Q
Even at pairs, I prefer sound immediate actions over pre-empts, especially at adverse vulneraboility.
#9
Posted 2009-January-04, 00:04
If he has the hand to produce game opposite my hand, hopefully he won't sell out to 3C.
#10
Posted 2009-January-07, 19:00
For instance, he doesn't like being used as a human shield when we're being shot at.
I happen to think it's a very noble way to meet one's maker, especially for a guy like him.
Bottom line is we never let that difference of opinion interfere with anything."
#11
Posted 2009-January-07, 19:06
Partner held:
♠Qxx
♥Txx
♦KQxx
♣KTx
and found an unbelievable (to me anyway) pass. The 3♥ contract failed by a trick (losing a club, two spades, a spade ruff, and the trump queen) for -100 and a near-top.
Bidding 3♥ opposite a normal partner who goes to game on those cards gets you -200. Doubling gets you to 3NT which is also -200 if you cash out (worse if you don't). Passing was the true winner this time, netting a nice +50.
a.k.a. Appeal Without Merit
#13
Posted 2009-January-08, 07:43
Fluffy, on Jan 8 2009, 07:06 AM, said:
I dont find pass that unbelievable. Flat hand no ruffing value, and probably wasted king of clubs. Partner may have streched to act with shortness. I would like to defend with this hand.
I might bid 3NT, at IMPS but would give some consideration at passing.
Thats why double would work better from partner, so you will have maybe easier time now;)
#14
Posted 2009-January-08, 08:56
#15
Posted 2009-January-08, 22:04
#16
Posted 2009-January-09, 01:20
dcvetkov, on Jan 8 2009, 08:43 AM, said:
Fluffy, on Jan 8 2009, 07:06 AM, said:
I dont find pass that unbelievable. Flat hand no ruffing value, and probably wasted king of clubs. Partner may have streched to act with shortness. I would like to defend with this hand.
I might bid 3NT, at IMPS but would give some consideration at passing.
Thats why double would work better from partner, so you will have maybe easier time now;)
Pass over 3♥ is auto for me. Bidding very conservative 3rd-level overcalls and then expecting pard to raise with hand like this is not winning bridge.
#17
Posted 2009-January-09, 02:56
For me a two level overcall should be Rule of 20 with 2 quick tricks and a three level overcall should be a queen stronger. This hand is Rule of 20 with an extra quick trick and a proven stiff--these are at least equivalent to the needed queen.
Passing 3♥ on partner's hand seems automatic given these minimums.
#18
Posted 2009-January-09, 08:42

Help
