BBO Discussion Forums: Cause I'm strong enough - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

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

Cause I'm strong enough and I quit cryingggg

#1 User is offline   gwnn 

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

Posted 2010-April-05, 18:19

Jxx
-
AKJTxx
AJxx

1♥-p-p-???

if you x it will be

1♥-p-p-x
2♣-p-2♥-???

nobody V imps
... and I can prove it with my usual, flawless logic.
      George Carlin
0

#2 User is offline   655321 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,502
  • Joined: 2007-December-22

Posted 2010-April-05, 18:40

I would start with 2♦, then double 2♥ if they bid it.
That's impossible. No one can give more than one hundred percent. By definition that is the most anyone can give.
0

#3 User is offline   jdonn 

  • - - T98765432 AQT8
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 15,085
  • Joined: 2005-June-23
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Las Vegas, NV

Posted 2010-April-05, 18:42

I start with 2♦ as well, love to double but too much discrepancy here.
Please let me know about any questions or interest or bug reports about GIB.
0

#4 User is offline   aguahombre 

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

Posted 2010-April-05, 19:57

2d is fine...not quite enough for 3D.
"Bidding Spades to show spades can work well." (Kenberg)
0

#5 User is offline   Codo 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,373
  • Joined: 2003-March-15
  • Location:Hamburg, Germany
  • Interests:games and sports, esp. bridge,chess and (beach-)volleyball

Posted 2010-April-06, 03:06

At the table, I had doubled and hated me for it after 2 ♥ comes back. I doubt that 2 ♦ instead of double will be a long time winner- but it had worked better in this hand.
Kind Regards

Roland

Sanity Check: Failure (Fluffy)
More system is not the answer...
0

#6 User is offline   gnasher 

  • Andy Bowles
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 11,993
  • Joined: 2007-May-03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 2010-April-06, 04:35

If you were good enough to start with double instead of 2♦, you're good enough to bid 3♦ now.
... 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
0

#7 User is offline   gwnn 

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

Posted 2010-April-06, 05:05

that's what I was wondering.

also I didn't like 3♦ initially since that should normally be some 6322 no? not sure...
... and I can prove it with my usual, flawless logic.
      George Carlin
0

#8 User is offline   Phil 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,094
  • Joined: 2008-December-11
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Texas, USA
  • Interests:Mountain Biking

Posted 2010-April-06, 08:28

gwnn, on Apr 6 2010, 06:05 AM, said:

that's what I was wondering.

also I didn't like 3♦ initially since that should normally be some 6322 no? not sure...

I don't think an immediate 3♦ shows a balanced hand, but it certainly doesn't show the support we have for the black suits. For instance, you would rightfully take a very aggressive view if pard found a 3♣ response to your x.
Hi y'all!

Winner - BBO Challenge bracket #6 - February, 2017.
0

#9 User is offline   aguahombre 

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

Posted 2010-April-06, 09:14

If my maximum direct-seat overcall for 2D is about 17, then with "Add a King" for balancing seat action, I would need about a 15+ count to jump balance with 3D --same shape would have been ok.
"Bidding Spades to show spades can work well." (Kenberg)
0

#10 User is offline   ArtK78 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 7,786
  • Joined: 2004-September-05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Galloway NJ USA
  • Interests:Bridge, Poker, participatory and spectator sports.
    Occupation - Tax Attorney in Atlantic City, NJ.

Posted 2010-April-06, 09:33

In my opinion, this is a heavy 2♦ call in balancing seat.

I dislike double as it distorts the picture of my hand. Jxx of spades is hardly what I like to have in spades for a double in this position. Sure, we would be well placed if partner responded in clubs to my double, but the chances of that happening are very small.

After balancing with 2♦, if the opponents' 2♥ comes back to me I will double.

I don't strongly object to a 3♦ call in balancing seat on this hand, but it is a slight overbid and also virtually eliminates the possibility of playing in a black suit.
0

#11 User is offline   gnasher 

  • Andy Bowles
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 11,993
  • Joined: 2007-May-03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 2010-April-06, 10:03

I don't think this is the wrong shape for 3♦, but I do think it's too strong. I think ♦ shows roughly a sound minimum opening bid with a good 6-card suit. This is better than that.
... 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
0

#12 User is offline   Cyberyeti 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 15,350
  • Joined: 2009-July-13
  • Location:England

Posted 2010-April-06, 10:14

gnasher, on Apr 6 2010, 11:03 AM, said:

I don't think this is the wrong shape for 3♦, but I do think it's too strong.  I think ♦ shows roughly a sound minimum opening bid with a good 6-card suit.  This is better than that.

I certainly play the 4th seat jump overcall as intermediate to strong, so I'm a fraction underweight, but think I'd do it anyway.
0

#13 User is offline   jdonn 

  • - - T98765432 AQT8
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 15,085
  • Joined: 2005-June-23
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Las Vegas, NV

Posted 2010-April-06, 10:20

gnasher, on Apr 6 2010, 11:03 AM, said:

I don't think this is the wrong shape for 3♦, but I do think it's too strong. I think ♦ shows roughly a sound minimum opening bid with a good 6-card suit. This is better than that.

Weird my objection is exactly the opposite. I think this is within the strength range for a jump to the 3 level in a lower suit but I'm too worried about missing another suit and misleading about my shape.
Please let me know about any questions or interest or bug reports about GIB.
0

#14 User is offline   MFA 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,625
  • Joined: 2006-October-04
  • Location:Denmark

Posted 2010-April-06, 13:44

I would try 3♦ with 2♦ as a close second choice. I don't like double because there are so many bad things about it.
I don't have spades and I'm pessimistic about finding partner with a 5card suit he couldn't overcall.
I don't like to play 1♥X with a void and a hidden strong 6-card suit.
I'm not strong enough really to bid diamonds freely next time.
So the primary hope for double seems to be to find clubs.
Michael Askgaard
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