KQJx
Jx
T98xxxx
-
p-(2♣ precision)-? all vul imps
AQxxx
Qxx
x
KQxx
1♥-p-1♠-3♦
3NT-p-? nobody vul imps
Page 1 of 1
two diamond related hands from the club
#1
Posted 2009-October-06, 19:07
... and I can prove it with my usual, flawless logic.
George Carlin
George Carlin
#2
Posted 2009-October-06, 20:51
If I played weak jump overcalls I would bid 3D on the first one, but usually don't play that. If partner has a diamond fit our hand has huge potential, and it's nice to mess them up a bit.
On the second one I would bid 4D hoping to bid keycard over a 4M response from partner and get to 7 sensibly if possible or stay out of 6.
On the second one I would bid 4D hoping to bid keycard over a 4M response from partner and get to 7 sensibly if possible or stay out of 6.
#3
Posted 2009-October-07, 00:49
1. Pass even if I had a weak bid in diamonds avaiable.
But I had liked to have the ... to bid 3 diamond.
2. 4 ♦ followed by 4 NT
But I had liked to have the ... to bid 3 diamond.
2. 4 ♦ followed by 4 NT
Kind Regards
Roland
Sanity Check: Failure (Fluffy)
More system is not the answer...
Roland
Sanity Check: Failure (Fluffy)
More system is not the answer...
#4
Posted 2009-October-07, 03:00
Jlall, on Oct 7 2009, 03:51 AM, said:
If I played weak jump overcalls I would bid 3D on the first one, but usually don't play that. If partner has a diamond fit our hand has huge potential, and it's nice to mess them up a bit.
On the second one I would bid 4D hoping to bid keycard over a 4M response from partner and get to 7 sensibly if possible or stay out of 6.
On the second one I would bid 4D hoping to bid keycard over a 4M response from partner and get to 7 sensibly if possible or stay out of 6.
I also don't play weak jump overcalls over a Precision 2♣, but I'm not sure that it's best. If it's correct to play
(1♥) [Precision] 3♦
as preemptive, surely it's right to play
(2♣) [Precision] 3♦
as preemptive too? In the 2♣ auction there is more doubt about major-suit fits, so the benefits of preempting should be greater.
... 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
#5
Posted 2009-October-07, 03:03
gnasher, on Oct 7 2009, 04:00 AM, said:
Jlall, on Oct 7 2009, 03:51 AM, said:
If I played weak jump overcalls I would bid 3D on the first one, but usually don't play that. If partner has a diamond fit our hand has huge potential, and it's nice to mess them up a bit.
On the second one I would bid 4D hoping to bid keycard over a 4M response from partner and get to 7 sensibly if possible or stay out of 6.
On the second one I would bid 4D hoping to bid keycard over a 4M response from partner and get to 7 sensibly if possible or stay out of 6.
I also don't play weak jump overcalls over a Precision 2♣, but I'm not sure that it's best. If it's correct to play
(1♥) [Precision] 3♦
as preemptive, surely it's right to play
(2♣) [Precision] 3♦
as preemptive too? In the 2♣ auction there is more doubt about major-suit fits, so the benefits of preempting should be greater.
I agree with this, I also don't play WJO after 1H ? if vul. It seems weird to play differently over 1H and a precision 2C though.
#6
Posted 2009-October-07, 03:10
On the second one, does 4♦ agree hearts, or is it initially choice-of-games?
... 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
#7
Posted 2009-October-10, 19:03
gnasher, on Oct 7 2009, 09:10 AM, said:
On the second one, does 4♦ agree hearts, or is it initially choice-of-games?
This was mostly what I was thinking about. I didn't know what it was so I tried the dubious 5♥ bid, which since undiscussed I knew partner would take as just natural slam try, partner passed and we were off two aces but had enough trumps so made.
The second one I bid 4♦ which kept them out of slam, but I wouldn't do it again. I wondered if anyone else would try it, I guess I'm alone.
... and I can prove it with my usual, flawless logic.
George Carlin
George Carlin
Page 1 of 1

Help
