Pick your poison
#1
Posted 2009-September-11, 21:18
#2
Posted 2009-September-11, 21:20
#3
Posted 2009-September-11, 22:57
--Always remember you're unique. Just like everyone else.
#4
Posted 2009-September-11, 23:36
#5
Posted 2009-September-11, 23:55
I feel optimistic about this hand.
Finding your own mistakes is more productive than looking for partner's. It improves your game and is good for your soul. (Nige1)
#6
Posted 2009-September-12, 00:41
#7
Posted 2009-September-12, 01:33
#8
Posted 2009-September-12, 03:00
Jlall, on Sep 12 2009, 02:33 AM, said:
But will he bid enough, extreme example, KQxxxx, xx, xx, xxx will give you plenty of play for 4S, even KQxxx, xx, xxx, xxx may be enough. I've seen 3N make opposite dummys as bad as Axxx, x, xxx, J10xxx when opponents' only crime is to lead their 9 card heart suit.
My partner and I have a treatment that I wouldn't use on this hand, but is worth mentioning that 1x-1y-2N is GF and not balanced with a 3C relay (weak NT and no gap between wide range 1N rebid and 2N opener), so 1D-1S-3D is limited by the failure to bid 1D-1S-2N-3C-3D and this hand is plenty good enough, but will shut out partner's spades.
I'd probably invent a 2H bid. If partner raises, he will guarantee me a 5th spade so there's no issue there. I'll take the risk he's 4315 with a bad hand.
#9
Posted 2009-September-12, 03:51
Jlall, on Sep 11 2009, 11:33 PM, said:
Agree. I hate raising with 3 card support and don't often do it. But on this hand I would since you have a bit more than a minimum hand, 3 card support with 2 honors, and a suit to ruff, plus a possible source of tricks.
#10
Posted 2009-September-12, 07:10
We are all connected to each other biologically, to the Earth chemically, and to the rest of the universe atomically.
We're in the universe, and the universe is in us.
#12
Posted 2009-September-12, 08:29
#13
Posted 2009-September-14, 09:45
Winner - BBO Challenge bracket #6 - February, 2017.
#14
Posted 2009-September-15, 06:11
#15
Posted 2009-September-15, 06:54
I have some concerns about it, though. If partner is slamish, he has a lot of work to do sorting out the right strain. All five strains could be right after our simple raise. Hence it is not obvious that 2NT, 3♦ or even 3♣ should be forcing if one of those is his next bid. I suppose they all are, but if we also raise on 3 with all kind of minimum hands, we will end up in 3♠ in a 3-4 fit on a regular basis. Now this hand would accept any invite but even that hand causes a problem - how do we show 6 diamonds, 3 spades and extras over partner's 2NT inquiry?
#16
Posted 2009-September-15, 06:58
#17
Posted 2009-September-15, 07:07
helene_t, on Sep 15 2009, 02:54 PM, said:
I have some concerns about it, though. If partner is slamish, he has a lot of work to do sorting out the right strain. All five strains could be right after our simple raise. Hence it is not obvious that 2NT, 3♦ or even 3♣ should be forcing if one of those is his next bid. I suppose they all are, but if we also raise on 3 with all kind of minimum hands, we will end up in 3♠ in a 3-4 fit on a regular basis. Now this hand would accept any invite but even that hand causes a problem - how do we show 6 diamonds, 3 spades and extras over partner's 2NT inquiry?
I play 1♦-1♠; 2♠-2NT as forcing (often with exactly four spades), which means opener can bid something else than 3♠ with only three card support. After 2NT I would bid 3♦ with the current shape. I can't differentiate between "min" and "extras", but in the system I usually play the range is not very wide anyway (11-14 as 15-17 would rebid 3♦ showing 6♦-3♠).
#18
Posted 2009-September-15, 14:23
Harald
#19
Posted 2009-September-15, 14:54
helene_t, on Sep 15 2009, 07:54 AM, said:
I have some concerns about it, though. If partner is slamish, he has a lot of work to do sorting out the right strain. All five strains could be right after our simple raise. Hence it is not obvious that 2NT, 3♦ or even 3♣ should be forcing if one of those is his next bid. I suppose they all are, but if we also raise on 3 with all kind of minimum hands, we will end up in 3♠ in a 3-4 fit on a regular basis. Now this hand would accept any invite but even that hand causes a problem - how do we show 6 diamonds, 3 spades and extras over partner's 2NT inquiry?
The method that I use over 1m-1M-2M-2NT is:
3♣ - minimum hand with 3 card support for partner's major.
3♦ - maximum hand with 3 card support for partner's major.
3♥ - minimum hand with 4 card support for partner's major.
3♠ - maximum hand with 4 card support for partner's major.
Higher bids would show a maximum, 4 card support and another feature. For example, after opening 1♦ and raising partner's major suit response, over partner's 2NT inquiry 4♦ would show a very good diamond suit, 4 card support for partner's major and a maximum.
With only 3 card support for partner's major suit, one cannot just start jumping around, as 3NT may be the right place to play the hand. The 3♦ response to 2NT is game forcing, as a maximum hand opposite a hand good enough to inquire must be enough to bid game. So partner can start looking for slam by just rebidding his major or making some other call other than 3NT or 4 of his major.
#20
Posted 2009-September-15, 15:06
I use 2NT for slam investigation hehe.

Help

1♦ - (p) - 1♠ - (p)
?