[phil_20686]

FWIW, im wondering why i havent already bid 4s.

With some partners i could have bid 4s on round one. Now after I bid a NF 2S and partner decided he has enough for another try, I will bid 4S. If partner has a spade void he was quite likely to have passed 2s. Why would he force the bidding higher opposite a NF bid without some form of secondard support? If he has a void he will have even more extras. My hand is suitable to play opposite a void and useless in any other denomination. I expect partner to put down a 15 count with a stiff spade.

I suppose since its MP i could be persuaded that it was better to take it slow, but if i just bid 4s confidently over partners 1d bid then i might get to play there undoubled when opps are making game.

*waits for inevitable abuse*

[gwnn]

phil_20686, on Sep 10 2009, 07:30 PM, said:

FWIW, im wondering why i havent already bid 4s.

With some partners i could have bid 4s on round one. Now after I bid a NF 2S and partner decided he has enough for another try, I will bid 4S. If partner has a spade void he was quite likely to have passed 2s. Why would he force the bidding higher opposite a NF bid without some form of secondard support? If he has a void he will have even more extras. My hand is suitable to play opposite a void and useless in any other denomination. I expect partner to put down a 15 count with a stiff spade.

I suppose since its MP i could be persuaded that it was better to take it slow, but if i just bid 4s confidently over partners 1d bid then i might get to play there undoubled when opps are making game.

*waits for inevitable abuse*

well I actually bid 4♠ . I guess this could be interpreted as abuse

[Jlall]

The_Hog, on Sep 10 2009, 09:22 AM, said:

cherdanno, on Sep 10 2009, 08:34 PM, said:

Let me clarify, I think Csaba didn't write this clearly enough: we have KQT98-7th of spades. That's two trump losers opposite a void and a 5-0 split.


(I hope I don't get censored for shouting the spade suit now, but outside of the laws forum I should be safe I assume.)

Ok Thx. It looked like a 6 carder to me. Yes, with 7 I also bid 3S, though I think Lall would have bid 3 with 6 only based on his posts.

LOL

[kgr]

jillybean, on Sep 10 2009, 03:25 PM, said:

I'll change my bbf vote to 3♠ but would probably still pass at the table. The 3lvl isn't where I want to be on a misfit, I want to get out early.

This was also my 1st thought, but I changed my mind before reading the posts.
You already told you partner that you are weak with Spades. With 3S you only say that you think that Spades play better then D.
You will still get out at the 3-level.

[phil_20686]

gwnn, on Sep 10 2009, 01:10 PM, said:

phil_20686, on Sep 10 2009, 07:30 PM, said:

FWIW, im wondering why i havent already bid 4s.

With some partners i could have bid 4s on round one. Now after I bid a NF 2S and partner decided he has enough for another try, I will bid 4S. If partner has a spade void he was quite likely to have passed 2s. Why would he force the bidding higher opposite a NF bid without some form of secondard support? If he has a void he will have even more extras. My hand is suitable to play opposite a void and useless in any other denomination. I expect partner to put down a 15 count with a stiff spade.

I suppose since its MP i could be persuaded that it was better to take it slow, but if i just bid 4s confidently over partners 1d bid then i might get to play there undoubled when opps are making game.

*waits for inevitable abuse*

well I actually bid 4♠ . I guess this could be interpreted as abuse

did it make?

[gwnn]

partner had

-
Ax
KQJxxx
Axxxx

and trumps were AJ7xx after me. I think I can get out for -2 somehow but it was 150. Of course partner does not have a 3♦ bid.

[vuroth]

gwnn, on Sep 10 2009, 01:47 PM, said:

partner had

-
Ax
KQJxxx
Axxxx

and trumps were AJ7xx after me. I think I can get out for -2 somehow but it was 150. Of course partner does not have a 3♦ bid.

I probably bid 3♣ instead of 3♦ there, because I hate giving up on 65s, especially 6520. Also, 3♣ just seems more descriptive.

Obviously, I'll pass 3♦ and 3♠.

[Jlall]

gwnn, on Sep 10 2009, 01:47 PM, said:

partner had

-
Ax
KQJxxx
Axxxx

Of course partner does not have a 3♦ bid.

3D looks fine to me, you could bid 3C but with diamonds so much better than clubs I would much prefer to play diamonds if partner is 2-3 or so. Certainly if partner had the DT 3D is a standout bid.

[Cascade]

The_Hog, on Sep 10 2009, 03:23 PM, said:

Cascade, on Sep 10 2009, 09:49 AM, said:

snipped
He will appreciate that stiff jack or ace is huge and any singleton is ok.

He can't have that.

I think partner can.

With a constructive hand with the ♠A for example it will not always be obvious to partner than Spades is best and so moving with 3♦ is entirely possible.

[Cascade]

Jlall, on Sep 10 2009, 06:21 PM, said:

The reason that partner bids 3D even if he has A SPADE is that 2S might be bid on pretty much any 6 card suit because partner might be 6412 or so and can't preference back to diamonds or pass clubs.

And even with 6421 at MPs.

[Cascade]

vuroth, on Sep 11 2009, 12:57 AM, said:

My intermediate vote is for 3♠. I'm not sure why I would want to play in a 7 card fit in a minor at matchpoints when I have a 7 card major.

V

If the spades weren't very good and both contracts rated to be going down.

But that is not what we have here.

[the hog]

gwnn, on Sep 11 2009, 01:47 AM, said:

partner had

-
Ax
KQJxxx
Axxxx

and trumps were AJ7xx after me. I think I can get out for -2 somehow but it was 150. Of course partner does not have a 3♦ bid.

Well, that was always on the cards, wasn't it?

[gwnn]

you mean partner misbidding, lho having aj7xx or the spade void?

[the hog]

That the S were going to be stacked against you.