Impossible problem.
#1
Posted 2004-July-14, 08:06
All vul
(1S) P (P) ?
x
Q
Txx
AKT9xxxx
Your bid?
#3
Posted 2004-July-14, 08:17
RHO couldn't find a bid, suggesting that he's quite weak (assume 5HCP)
Either LHO is sitting on a rockcrusher OR
partner is sitting on a Spade stack waiting for me to double OR
Its something in between.
Regardless, 2C looks to be a reasonable bid. If I am going to defend a Spade contract, please let it be something OTHER than 1S. And please let partner lead a club so that I can shoot a heart back through if it looks appropriate...
#4
Posted 2004-July-14, 08:20
#5
Posted 2004-July-14, 08:22
Not a great bridge bid, no ♠, ♥ or ♦ stopper, but something I think has a very reasonable chance of success at matchpoin. Once again, no doubt I will be alone on this one.
Ben
#6
Posted 2004-July-14, 08:27
The ♥Q is a big card - might overrruff a spade in a heart contract, might add potency to partner's heart holding in a heart contract, might help stop hearts in notrump.
I'm going to bid just 2♣ for now. (I don't think any jump is a preempt - and even if it were, it probably wouldn't shut out LHO who is probably waiting to make a takeout double with a huge hand or bid some hearts. Hopefully, I'll know what to do next time. If I get passed out in 2♣ (in a dream world), it's gotta be better than defending one spade. Hopefully partner can bid notrump. I wouldn't want to be in 3NT over 3S since I don't have hearts or diamonds stopped either and opener, upon winning the ♠A will probably know how to take his five or more tricks.
I really don't expect to be defending a spade contract. If anything, I expect to be defending hearts, and if it turns out that way, I have to hope that the bad splits in the majors will give us a plus score.
#7
Posted 2004-July-14, 08:28
The_Hog, on Jul 14 2004, 05:20 PM, said:
I considered pass as a reasonable alternative to 2C.
I'm worried that any balancing action could lead to defending a 4H contract.
However, I'm more comfortable defending 4M than 1S and I really want that Club lead...
#8
Posted 2004-July-14, 08:34
inquiry, on Jul 14 2004, 09:22 AM, said:
Not a great bridge bid, no ♠, ♥ or ♦ stopper, but something I think has a very reasonable chance of success at matchpoin. Once again, no doubt I will be alone on this one.
Ben
Judging by the recent Master Solver's Club answers in the Bridge World, I expect you to be far from alone in your 3NT bid.
To the Hog: I strongly considered Pass (let sleeping hearts lie.) I finally rejected it, based on two things - first, I expect to go plus at least half the time if I bid, and secondly, everybody else is going to bid and if we all defend 4♥, my partner is a better defender than the field, and it doesn't look like I'm going to have many defensive decisions
#9
Posted 2004-July-14, 08:37
It also disables them from bidding a second suit at 2-level. 3NT is a good alternative, since I'd probably open 3NT Gambling in 1st & 2nd seat.
#11
Posted 2004-July-14, 08:39
Free, on Jul 14 2004, 05:37 PM, said:
It also disables them from bidding a second suit at 2-level. 3NT is a good alternative, since I'd probably open 3NT Gambling in 1st & 2nd seat.
While 3♣ is constructive, it normally shows a much stronger hand.
#12
Posted 2004-July-14, 08:40
paulhar, on Jul 15 2004, 12:34 AM, said:
inquiry, on Jul 14 2004, 09:22 AM, said:
Not a great bridge bid, no ♠, ♥ or ♦ stopper, but something I think has a very reasonable chance of success at matchpoin. Once again, no doubt I will be alone on this one.
Ben
Judging by the recent Master Solver's Club answers in the Bridge World, I expect you to be far from alone in your 3NT bid.
To the Hog: I strongly considered Pass (let sleeping hearts lie.) I finally rejected it, based on two things - first, I expect to go plus at least half the time if I bid, and secondly, everybody else is going to bid and if we all defend 4♥, my partner is a better defender than the field, and it doesn't look like I'm going to have many defensive decisions
Fair enough Paul, I can't argue with that reasoning!
(First time for everything!)
#13
Posted 2004-July-14, 08:44
We discussed this for half an hour. I voted for pass because I was worried about a 4H contract.
Interesting decisions - so many things could be right.
#14
Posted 2004-July-14, 08:55
#15
Posted 2004-July-14, 09:02
I wonder if there's a way to determine how many times you have game and how many times they have game when the auction is 1M-P-P and you only have a 7/8 card minor with heads and almost nothing in the side. I think partnership style about doubling and overcalling as well as opponents style is the key to the answer so there's no exact solution.
#16
Posted 2004-July-14, 09:24
JRG, on Jul 14 2004, 09:55 AM, said:
Not likely. Partner has spade length. Partner will probably try to force rather than try for ruffs. From partner's point of view, he could lead a club and find dummy with: J, xxx, xxx, Q109xxx (ouch! looks like one of my leads!
#17
Posted 2004-July-14, 12:32
Partner will make the right decision over 3♣
#18
Posted 2004-July-14, 12:51
What I really can't understand is 3♣, a bid that in 90% of the books is used to show a 13-15 hand with a good club suit.
Example:
xx, AQx, Kx, KQJxxx
Reopening is not a situation where a good player can intend to guess what a bid means, it's a situation where you must know what you play and most partnerships play a jump in a new suit as 13-15 with a good suit.
Luis.
#19
Posted 2004-July-14, 13:07
#20
Posted 2004-July-14, 14:08
luis, on Jul 14 2004, 06:51 PM, said:
What I really can't understand is 3♣, a bid that in 90% of the books is used to show a 13-15 hand with a good club suit.
Example:
xx, AQx, Kx, KQJxxx
Reopening is not a situation where a good player can intend to guess what a bid means, it's a situation where you must know what you play and most partnerships play a jump in a new suit as 13-15 with a good suit.
Luis.
Bidding 3N (or 3♠) on a hand where we are potentially wide open in three suits does not seem to be a apt description of this hand. If 3♣ really that much of an overbid?
3N is excellent opposite this - and a lot of similar hands:
Qxxx
Kxx
Axx
xxx.
Automatic over a 3♣ balance. Over a 2♣ balance, I suppose you might play it right there.
5♣ or 6♣ looks good opposite:
xxxx
AKxx
AQx
xx
You might get to 5♣ opposite this, but the balancer will need to make a very strong move on the next round, after a 2♣ reopening.
I guess I don't understand the passers comments on this one, sorry. I'm not smart enough to not balance the opponents into game; I tend to be agressive with balancing and accept the occasional strange result of the opponents unearthing their buried 10 card fit. I've learned to not make the ensuing spite double though

Help
