Help
All calls are natural. What's going on here? What hand does partner have? What should you bid? And who has major suit cards in this auction?
Page 1 of 1
What the blazes? Where are the majors?
#1
- Tubthumper
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 2,835
- Joined: 2007-July-11
- Gender:Male
- Location:Portland, OR, USA
- Interests:Bridge, pool, financial crime. New experiences, new people.
Posted 2009-February-12, 01:10
All calls are natural. What's going on here? What hand does partner have? What should you bid? And who has major suit cards in this auction?
Chris Gibson
#2
- Andy Bowles
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 11,993
- Joined: 2007-May-03
- Gender:Male
- Location:London, UK
Posted 2009-February-12, 01:57
He's 5-6, obviously, and I don't think it promises any great high-card strength - AQxxx and KQxxxx would be fine. I bid 4♦, which sounds forcing.
No idea about the majors. It seems that someone has done something rather odd, but I'm not going to assume it's my partner.
No idea about the majors. It seems that someone has done something rather odd, but I'm not going to assume it's my partner.
... that would still not be conclusive proof, before someone wants to explain that to me as well as if I was a 5 year-old. - gwnn
#3
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 1,033
- Joined: 2008-December-05
Posted 2009-February-12, 02:39
Funny I was talking to Han and Clee about this auction (except 2H on the second bid not 2D), it just came up for me and I don't remember it happening before. Anyways I was of the opinion that it showed 56 and was non forcing.
New website: http://www.justinlall.com
#4
- Tubthumper
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 2,835
- Joined: 2007-July-11
- Gender:Male
- Location:Portland, OR, USA
- Interests:Bridge, pool, financial crime. New experiences, new people.
Posted 2009-February-12, 09:37
There's a story behind this. Basically, North alerted X, then, when asked, gave an explanation of "single suited". HIs explanation was contrary to our agreements, but I was wondering what my obligations are with this hand. I just bid 5 diamonds, since I thought that if partner was 5-6 with any sort of reasonable hand, that would be my most likely bid, but was curious what others would do in a more normal auction. I was also curious afterwards if "bridge logic" would allow me to infer that something had gone wrong.
Chris Gibson
#5
- World International Master without a clue
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 17,404
- Joined: 2003-November-13
- Gender:Male
- Location:madrid
Posted 2009-February-12, 09:43
56 is the only thing that makes sense, but it is contrary to my opening style, do you think 46 is ever possible?
#6
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 913
- Joined: 2003-August-18
- Location:California, USA
Posted 2009-February-12, 12:05
Partner's pull to 2♦ will be about the same hand whether the double is one-suited or balance of power: a hand too shapely to play for penalties. The only question is how many diamonds to bid.
#7
- Andy Bowles
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 11,993
- Joined: 2007-May-03
- Gender:Male
- Location:London, UK
Posted 2009-February-12, 12:56
CSGibson, on Feb 12 2009, 04:37 PM, said:
There's a story behind this. Basically, North alerted X, then, when asked, gave an explanation of "single suited". HIs explanation was contrary to our agreements, but I was wondering what my obligations are with this hand. I just bid 5 diamonds, since I thought that if partner was 5-6 with any sort of reasonable hand, that would be my most likely bid, but was curious what others would do in a more normal auction. I was also curious afterwards if "bridge logic" would allow me to infer that something had gone wrong.
Is 5♦ is a logical alternative? Yes, probably.
Does the UI suggest doing something else? Yes.
I think you were right to bid 5♦.
... that would still not be conclusive proof, before someone wants to explain that to me as well as if I was a 5 year-old. - gwnn
Page 1 of 1
1♣-(1N)-X-(P),
2♦-(p)-?