BBO Discussion Forums: splinter too committal? - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

splinter too committal?

#1 User is offline   wank 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,866
  • Joined: 2008-July-13

Posted 2010-March-14, 16:04

Scoring: IMP


1D from p, RHO overcalls 2C.

what do you bid here? if you X and p bids 2H over that, is 4D forcing?

assume you're playing 5542 openings and strong NT. would it affect your choice if you're playing 1D as unbalanced (i.e. 5+ unbal unless 4441)?

don't bother telling me about your pet convention - it's a judgement question.

fwiw, i didn't have the hand but i was asked my opinion.
0

#2 User is offline   gwnn 

  • Csaba the Hutt
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 13,027
  • Joined: 2006-June-16
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Göttingen, Germany
  • Interests:bye

Posted 2010-March-14, 16:42

i think you may start with double to look for spades since you're so strong. you can then later bid diamonds over almost all levels of club preemption. if they bid 6 then you will x and that will hardly be a bad result.
... and I can prove it with my usual, flawless logic.
      George Carlin
0

#3 User is offline   karlson 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 974
  • Joined: 2005-April-06

Posted 2010-March-14, 17:38

If the diamond is unbalanced, I would splinter. Of course it's possible that 4 will be better than 5, but I think it's reasonable unlikely. 6 on the other hand looks like a very real target, and this is the most direct route to try to get there.

One of the things I started doing more playing unbalanced diamond is suppressing a major in order to raise diamonds, and it's worked out quite well every time I can remember. On the other hand, the difference in expected diamond length is not actually all that great, so I'm starting to think that maybe people don't do this enough even playing standard. I think playing standard, this hand is just barely not strong enough, so I would still double, but I think it's close and I would definitely consider 4c more now than I did before.
0

#4 User is offline   kenrexford 

  • Brain Farts and Actual Farts Increasing with Age
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 9,586
  • Joined: 2005-September-21
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Lima, Allen County, North-West-Central Ohio, USA
  • Interests:www.limadbc.blogspot.com editor/contributor

Posted 2010-March-14, 19:11

karlson, on Mar 14 2010, 06:38 PM, said:

If the diamond is unbalanced, I would splinter. Of course it's possible that 4 will be better than 5, but I think it's reasonable unlikely. 6 on the other hand looks like a very real target, and this is the most direct route to try to get there.

One of the things I started doing more playing unbalanced diamond is suppressing a major in order to raise diamonds, and it's worked out quite well every time I can remember. On the other hand, the difference in expected diamond length is not actually all that great, so I'm starting to think that maybe people don't do this enough even playing standard. I think playing standard, this hand is just barely not strong enough, so I would still double, but I think it's close and I would definitely consider 4c more now than I did before.

VERY good analysis. I have played unbalanced diamond for about 20 years, and suppressing majors is often extremely rewarding. I had the same thoughts, therefore, to the T as what you wrote.
"Gibberish in, gibberish out. A trial judge, three sets of lawyers, and now three appellate judges cannot agree on what this law means. And we ask police officers, prosecutors, defense lawyers, and citizens to enforce or abide by it? The legislature continues to write unreadable statutes. Gibberish should not be enforced as law."

-P.J. Painter.
0

#5 User is offline   aguahombre 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 12,029
  • Joined: 2009-February-21
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:St. George, UT

Posted 2010-March-14, 19:34

Well, since OP suggested he was not interested in pet gadgets, and 1D, even though showing 4 of them, is not necessarily unbalanced -- I will give my answers to what was asked:

Yes, x then jump to 4D should be forcing.
Yes, that is what I would do.
Yes, the same if 1D=5+ unbalanced or 4 4 4 1.

P.s., suppressing a 4cM, though probably brilliant, is not something I am ready to do. Perhaps the implication that I have 4 spades will be useful to partner later in the auction.
"Bidding Spades to show spades can work well." (Kenberg)
0

#6 User is offline   the hog 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,728
  • Joined: 2003-March-07
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Laos
  • Interests:Wagner and Bridge

Posted 2010-March-14, 21:17

Anything but double looking for a 4-4 S fit is playing with yourself - in both forms of the expression.
4D after a x is certainly forcing.
"The King of Hearts a broadsword bears, the Queen of Hearts a rose." W. H. Auden.
0

#7 User is offline   Cyberyeti 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 13,900
  • Joined: 2009-July-13
  • Location:England

Posted 2010-March-15, 02:26

I think playing standard you have to X.

Not really a pet gadget, but we play inverted minors still on over the overcall and may conceal a 4 card major, so have no problem with this hand.
0

#8 User is offline   MinorKid 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 288
  • Joined: 2010-February-22
  • Location:Hong Kong, China
  • Interests:Physics<br>Play pool<br><br>Studying Precision System

Posted 2010-March-15, 03:59

I think 4 is better.
0

#9 User is offline   Fluffy 

  • World International Master without a clue
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,404
  • Joined: 2003-November-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:madrid

Posted 2010-March-15, 05:52

and does 4/ guarantee 4? I think so btut probably someone can find an exception
0

#10 User is offline   phil_20686 

  • Scotland
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,754
  • Joined: 2008-August-22
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scotland

Posted 2010-March-15, 08:26

gwnn, on Mar 14 2010, 05:42 PM, said:

i think you may start with double to look for spades since you're so strong. you can then later bid diamonds over almost all levels of club preemption. if they bid 6 then you will x and that will hardly be a bad result.

Suppose the auction goes:

1d 2c x 4c
4h P ?

Have i lost the ability to make a slam try in diamond? If i now bid 4s is that suggest a slam trty with spades and diamonds? or just agree hearts? I guess hwat you expect for 4h here depends a lot on what you would dble with and how aggressive your style is.

ALso, i dont really agree that you dble and then later bid 4d and its obviously a slam try. (obviously in some auctions it is), but if partner passed in the above auction I think you are forced into dbling again. Partner could still have 4 spades for his pass, and when he has a minimum balanced hand that is the strongest argument to play in spades. I would think that 4d here just shows a hand that for whatever reason is not preparet to stand 4cx. Maybe 6-4 with aggressive cards. I.e., i would think that:

1d 2c x 4c
p p 4d p
4M

is natural and still just looking for the best game.

Probably when you bid 4c you will sometimes reach an inferior game. But i suspect that if you dble, and if partner does have spades, you will often reach an inferior slam. Further, there must be gains from the improved accuracy of the slam bidding if you start with a slam move now. I would be much more inclinced to dble If i was a bit weaker. Here I think i have enough that 5d should be at least as good as 4s. So i will make a slam move with 4c.
The physics is theoretical, but the fun is real. - Sheldon Cooper
0

#11 User is offline   Fluffy 

  • World International Master without a clue
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,404
  • Joined: 2003-November-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:madrid

Posted 2010-March-15, 08:57

phil_20686, on Mar 15 2010, 02:26 PM, said:

Suppose the auction goes:

1d 2c x 4c
4h P ?

Have i lost the ability to make a slam try in diamond? If i now bid 4s is that suggest a slam trty with spades and diamonds? or just agree hearts? I guess hwat you expect for 4h here depends a lot on what you would dble with and how aggressive your style is.

4 must be a 2 suiter to have diamonds as a support spot in case hearts ain't the correct one. Now we know we have alarge diamond fit, but we are missing 5 keycards (AK K A A). Maybe partner has singleton spade, but trying for slam its kinda complicated now. Preempts work.
0

#12 User is offline   hanp 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,987
  • Joined: 2009-February-15

Posted 2010-March-15, 11:15

I would bid 4C over any 1D opening that shows 4 diamonds. The hand is so good that I'll risk missing a spade game to optimize my chances of finding a good diamond slam.

With such strong hearts it doesn't seem likely that 6S in a 4-4 is going to be much better than 6D in the 5-4.
and the result can be plotted on a graph.
0

#13 User is offline   ajm218 

  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 88
  • Joined: 2003-March-20

Posted 2010-March-15, 13:32

The actual auction was:

1 (2) x P
2 (3) 4 P
?

Seems the consensus here is that 4 would agree s and 4 is forcing showing and ? 3 would be inv therefore?
0

#14 User is offline   Fluffy 

  • World International Master without a clue
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,404
  • Joined: 2003-November-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:madrid

Posted 2010-March-15, 13:37

3 would be NF, but competitive rather than invitational (4243 for example), with the invitational you might prefer another double.
0

#15 User is offline   aguahombre 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 12,029
  • Joined: 2009-February-21
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:St. George, UT

Posted 2010-March-15, 13:37

ajm218, on Mar 15 2010, 01:32 PM, said:

The actual auction was:

1 (2) x P
2 (3) 4 P
?

Seems the consensus here is that 4 would agree s and 4 is forcing showing and ? 3 would be inv therefore?

I think so. And 4H would also show hearts :rolleyes:
"Bidding Spades to show spades can work well." (Kenberg)
0

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users