control / to play? why?
#1
Posted 2010-April-03, 03:47
1♦-1NT
2♥-3NT
4♦-4♥
3NT: to play, 2NT would have been Lebensohl, 3x forcing
4♦: forcing
4♥: control for ♦ or preference for ♥ (eg 3c♥)? (4NT iso 4♥ would have been to play)
....why?
1♦-1♥
2♣-2♠
2NT-3♥
3NT-4♦
4♥
2♣: real but forcing
2♠: 4th suit GF
2NT: ♠-stop, no 3c♥, better then 3NT
3NT: prefer 3NT over 4♥ opposite a 6c♥
4♦: natural and slam interest (6+♥, 3+♦)
4♥: control for ♦ or preference for ♥ (eg small doubleton; or honour singleton)?
....why?
#2
Posted 2010-April-03, 06:22
2nd: sounds like responder has hefty 4531/4630, so again 4NT as H-Q.
Of course pick-ups have 4NT always conventional. Stuck.
#4
Posted 2010-April-03, 07:07
1) 4♥ is a cuebid. I don't think 'sudden desperate' preferences into a 4-3 fit on the four level exist when partner is slamgoing. I would interpret 4♥, 4♠ and 5♣ as cuebids and 4NT as natural. I would be happy to cuebid the ♥Q here if my hand is suitable for a diamond slam.
2) Natural. I don't like being excluded from suggesting 4M when one of us has shown a long suit there. To make qualified decisions about playing 5-2s, 6-1s or even 5-1s we need these kind of delayed support bids to show some fit. Or responder would be left to gamble on his own on 4M too often with an inadequate suit.
For 4♥ to be a cuebid, when 4M is still feasible because one of us has 5+, a rule of thumb could be that the minor should already have been agreed with a previous cuebid.
The opening hand should bid as described with a stiff H in hearts, minimum and a mediocre diamond suit. For instance.
#5
Posted 2010-April-03, 15:10
2) Would take this one as "To Play". By going via 2N you mention you show a slightly better hand than direct 3N? 4♦ could be like a mild slam try to see if you're at the top of your range. In that case 4♥ could very well be a nice place to stop if you don't have too much extra. Responder has shown 6+♥s and you have bid NT, so 4♥ definitely still looks like a plausable contract to play in (rather than the 4-3♥ fit).
#6
Posted 2010-April-03, 15:15
#7
Posted 2010-April-03, 15:46
No opinion about the 2nd - either seem possible to me.
Winner - BBO Challenge bracket #6 - February, 2017.
#8
Posted 2010-April-03, 15:56
#9
Posted 2010-April-03, 16:14
#10
Posted 2010-April-03, 16:22
#11
Posted 2010-April-03, 17:03
#12
Posted 2010-April-03, 17:05
Second one sounds like natural, I have my doubts given that you think 4♦ guarantees 3♦s, but if it sounds natural it must be natural, and anyway, what kind of control can you have if you failed to raise before?
#13
Posted 2010-April-04, 03:55
1st: you don't play in a 4/3 when slam interest. So that is control
2nd: (less clear); ♥xx or ♥H; proposal to play.
#14
Posted 2010-April-04, 04:00
scoring mix of IMP's and MP's.
1♦-1NT (West can bid 3♣ 6-card invite, 2♣ would have been GF)
2♥-3NT (West maybe better bids 3♣, but preferred 3NT with misfit)
4♦-4♥ (West tried to play in ♥?? but East took this as a cue)
6♦-All Pass
#15
Posted 2010-April-04, 04:09
1♦-2♦ (2♦=one suited major, weak or closed major)
2♥-3♥ (3♥=closed major with max 1 honor at the side=>not correct system bid and impossible for West because he has ♥K)
3NT-4♦
4♥-6♦
All Pass (Maybe West should trust East and bid 6♥??)
This should have gone?:
1♦-1♥
2♣-2♠ (2♣ forcing, 2♠ 4th suit GF)
2NT- 3♥ (2NT extras)
3NT-4♦
....How to continue to 7♥??
4♥-4♠
5♣-5♦
7♥
#16
Posted 2010-April-04, 04:21
kgr, on Apr 4 2010, 10:00 AM, said:
scoring mix of IMP's and MP's.
1♦-1NT (West can bid 3♣ 6-card invite, 2♣ would have been GF)
2♥-3NT (West maybe better bids 3♣, but preferred 3NT with misfit)
4♦-4♥ (West tried to play in ♥?? but East took this as a cue)
6♦-All Pass
Diamonds are too weak to reopen with 4♦, 4♣ is a much better bid
#17
Posted 2010-April-04, 04:23
Fluffy, on Apr 4 2010, 12:21 PM, said:
kgr, on Apr 4 2010, 10:00 AM, said:
|
|
scoring mix of IMP's and MP's.
1♦-1NT (West can bid 3♣ 6-card invite, 2♣ would have been GF)
2♥-3NT (West maybe better bids 3♣, but preferred 3NT with misfit)
4♦-4♥ (West tried to play in ♥?? but East took this as a cue)
6♦-All Pass
Diamonds are too weak to reopen with 4♦, 4♣ is a much better bid
Is 4♣ not more a 0454?
#18
Posted 2010-April-04, 12:48
kgr, on Apr 4 2010, 05:00 AM, said:
scoring mix of IMP's and MP's.
1♦-1NT (West can bid 3♣ 6-card invite, 2♣ would have been GF)
2♥-3NT (West maybe better bids 3♣, but preferred 3NT with misfit)
4♦-4♥ (West tried to play in ♥?? but East took this as a cue)
6♦-All Pass
3NT is a terrible bid, as it would usually be on this auction. What misfit, they had a 9 card fit but west just didn't bother to find out.

Help
