Help
I agree with what Andy writes here. Of course we can have game if partner has the perfectly fitting cards and shape, but in practice he is very unlikely to have exactly those cards. First of all because those perfect hands are not so likely to begin with, and secondly because the opponents would have bid game already.
Regional Pairs 1
#21
- Under bidder
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 11,797
- Joined: 2004-July-25
- Gender:Male
- Location:Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Posted 2012-September-06, 06:33
Please note: I am interested in boring, bog standard, 2/1.
- hrothgar
- hrothgar
#22
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 14,935
- Joined: 2009-July-13
- Location:England
Posted 2012-September-06, 08:21
gnasher, on 2012-September-06, 04:52, said:
These double-fit hands look very nice, but they don't seem terribly likely to me. As you say, the opponents are close to game. They also have the majority of the high cards. If they really had two eight-card fits with every high-card down to the ten (apart from ♥J), I'd expect them to be in game, not messing about at the three-level. It seems to me far more likely that partner's hand includes three clubs or some values in the opponents' suits, or both.
But at the table I wouldn't really think about any of this - I'd get no further than thinking that I have a minimum hand for my actions so far, a worrying club holding, and a shortage that partner already knows about. He can construct hands too; if he thinks we should be in game opposite this, he should have bid it already.
But at the table I wouldn't really think about any of this - I'd get no further than thinking that I have a minimum hand for my actions so far, a worrying club holding, and a shortage that partner already knows about. He can construct hands too; if he thinks we should be in game opposite this, he should have bid it already.
I would have thought 2326 opposite 3532 was pretty likely here for the opps and would look like plenty of losers not to bid game even with 2 8 card fits with all the high cards.
If I was the partner of the 2♠ bidder I would have no idea how to construct a hand for partner, as it shows nothing like this in my book.
#23
- World International Master without a clue
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 17,404
- Joined: 2003-November-13
- Gender:Male
- Location:madrid
Posted 2012-September-06, 10:21
rhm, on 2012-September-05, 04:18, said:
It is MP and you are vulnerable. This is not Rubber Bridge.
I doubt that successful pairs tactics requires such a powerhouse for bidding 2♠ in this sequence.
Otherwise your spade fit will get buried frequently.
And consequently raising a secondary suit with a yarborough vulnerable at pairs in a part-score battle unless very distributional is just asking for trouble.
In pairs you have to cater for the likely layouts not the rare ones.
Rainer Herrmann
I doubt that successful pairs tactics requires such a powerhouse for bidding 2♠ in this sequence.
Otherwise your spade fit will get buried frequently.
And consequently raising a secondary suit with a yarborough vulnerable at pairs in a part-score battle unless very distributional is just asking for trouble.
In pairs you have to cater for the likely layouts not the rare ones.
Rainer Herrmann
Letting the opponents play 3♥ when we have double fit is ridicoulous regardless of the form of scoring