Help
I think JDeegan makes several tenuous assumptions:
1. There is no reason to think the preemptor has anything but K-7th of clubs. A spade, diamond or even heart card is possible.
2. There is no basis to make any assumptions about RHO's shape. While 7222 is less likely than 7(321) it has little or no bearing on this exercise. While it is convenient to place a spade fragment on RHO's hand, there is no reason for it.
3. There is no reason to think that LHO has hearts when partner does not.
4. There is plenty of reason to think that partner will pass 3♥ when you are cold for four, but not for the reasons he states. I would be concerned with partner having a partial fit in diamonds that makes 4♥ excellent. I think its pretty unlikely we are getting a raise with xx, and wouldn't be surprised if I don't get a raise with Hx of hearts, with some bits and pieces in diamonds and spades.
Over a preemptive 3C
#21
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 10,093
- Joined: 2008-December-11
- Gender:Male
- Location:North Texas, USA
- Interests:Mountain Biking
Posted 2010-October-26, 10:23
Hi y'all!
Winner - BBO Challenge bracket #6 - February, 2017.
Winner - BBO Challenge bracket #6 - February, 2017.
#22
- Vesuvius the Violent Volcano
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 3,216
- Joined: 2008-December-04
- Gender:Male
- Location:Tampa-Area, Florida
- Interests:SLEEPING
Posted 2010-October-26, 10:33
I am a 3♥ bidder, mainly because I want to be able to bid 3N over 3♠ by partner. Although 4♥ could easily be right, it also can be very wrong if partner decided to bid 4♠ over this, or when partner has a ♥ stiff. Although I may be missing some games by bidding only 3♥, I think it is worth it.
I'll also admit that bidding 6♦ over 3♣ came to mind.
I'll also admit that bidding 6♦ over 3♣ came to mind.
Yay for the "Ignored Users" feature!
#23
- Redoubling with gusto
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 1,712
- Joined: 2009-October-19
- Gender:Male
- Location:Las Vegas, NV
- Interests:Math, Bridge, Beer. Often at the same time.
Posted 2010-October-26, 11:18
mtvesuvius, on 2010-October-26, 10:33, said:
I'll also admit that bidding 6♦ over 3♣ came to mind.
lololol
"I think maybe so and so was caught cheating but maybe I don't have the names right". Sure, and I think maybe your mother .... Oh yeah, that was someone else maybe. -- kenberg
"...we live off being battle-scarred veterans who manage to hate our opponents slightly more than we hate each other. -- Hamman, re: Wolff
"...we live off being battle-scarred veterans who manage to hate our opponents slightly more than we hate each other. -- Hamman, re: Wolff
#24
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 430
- Joined: 2010-May-18
Posted 2010-October-26, 15:24
Why would I worry too much about partner bidding 4♠ over 4♥? The 4♥ bid doesn't promise spade support, does it?
#25
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 796
- Joined: 2010-October-21
- Gender:Male
- Location:Copenhagen, Denmark
Posted 2010-October-26, 16:39
4♥. I don't like a style with huge pressure on partner to find a raise. Give him ♦K and we are already about there.
I would have thought that the idea behind 3♥ was to get the diamond suit in, not to bid 3NT. Maybe that just underlines that I don't really understand 3♥.
If partner bids 4♠ natural over 4♥ I would be delighted, since it's not like my heart suit plays well opposite nothing from partner, so he will surely be right about getting out of hearts then.
I would have thought that the idea behind 3♥ was to get the diamond suit in, not to bid 3NT. Maybe that just underlines that I don't really understand 3♥.
If partner bids 4♠ natural over 4♥ I would be delighted, since it's not like my heart suit plays well opposite nothing from partner, so he will surely be right about getting out of hearts then.
Michael Askgaard
#26
- Andy Bowles
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 11,993
- Joined: 2007-May-03
- Gender:Male
- Location:London, UK
Posted 2010-October-26, 16:50
If partner bid 4♠ in reply to 4♥, I wouldn't think it was natural.
... 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
#27
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 10,093
- Joined: 2008-December-11
- Gender:Male
- Location:North Texas, USA
- Interests:Mountain Biking
Posted 2010-October-26, 16:51
mfa1010, on 2010-October-26, 16:39, said:
If partner bids 4♠ natural over 4♥ I would be delighted, since it's not like my heart suit plays well opposite nothing from partner, so he will surely be right about getting out of hearts then.
Exactly, this is actually a great dummy for spades, although I have a sneaking feeling if we can make 4♠, we can make lots of diamonds too.
Hi y'all!
Winner - BBO Challenge bracket #6 - February, 2017.
Winner - BBO Challenge bracket #6 - February, 2017.
#28
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 796
- Joined: 2010-October-21
- Gender:Male
- Location:Copenhagen, Denmark
Posted 2010-October-26, 17:01
gnasher, on 2010-October-26, 16:50, said:
If partner bid 4♠ in reply to 4♥, I wouldn't think it was natural.
Really? Seems tough to sacrifice a lovely 4♠ heaven to facilitate slam bidding just a tiny little bit.
Phil, on 2010-October-26, 16:51, said:
Exactly, this is actually a great dummy for spades, although I have a sneaking feeling if we can make 4♠, we can make lots of diamonds too.
Maybe it would then be time for the famous 6♦ leap?
Michael Askgaard
#29
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 649
- Joined: 2010-October-27
- Gender:Male
- Location:San Bernardino, CA USA
Posted 2010-October-29, 00:51
Put me down for 4♥--trumps are weak, but it's right on values and doesn't risk a ♠ response like X does. Thoughts of slam are fantasy fiction unless partner can advance over 4♥. The usual rule is "put 8 points in partner hand and bid what you think you can make." I wouldn't criticize a conservative 3♥ because of possible ♠ waste, but X is koo-koo with a side void.