BBO Discussion Forums: MPs, your bid over weak two - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

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

MPs, your bid over weak two

#1 User is offline   AL78 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,213
  • Joined: 2019-October-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SE England
  • Interests:Bridge, hiking, cycling, gardening, weight training

Posted 2021-August-11, 02:55

I was playing with a novice on Monday evening in my first F2F bridge session for a year and a half (and picked up the worst hands at the table again, some things never change!). This is an awkward situation she was in on one board.

♠KJ2
♥Q9
♦AKJ32
♣AQ7

MPs, partner passes, RHO opens a weak 2♥. Your basic system is Acol, three weak twos, weak NT. You are not playing Lebensohl, so if you double partner will bid 3♣ which won't necessarily show values.
1

#2 User is offline   LBengtsson 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 974
  • Joined: 2017-August-10
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2021-August-11, 03:23

X looks best, your strength (18 good points, ♥Qx not included) is all enough to compensate for poor shape 3253. 3♦ looks wrong given your balanced shape. making guessing bid of 2NT will give poor result if opps. cash first 6 tricks. however, 2NT might work if partner has ♥ stop and useful side cards and suit (♣Kxxxx. But I still go with X as best bid here
4

#3 User is online   DavidKok 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,664
  • Joined: 2020-March-30
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Netherlands

Posted 2021-August-11, 03:38

X, and you'd really want (transfer) Lebensohl here. In its absence I will bid 3♦ over 3♣.
0

#4 User is offline   Winstonm 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,289
  • Joined: 2005-January-08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tulsa, Oklahoma
  • Interests:Art, music

Posted 2021-August-11, 07:52

Double, but as this is match points I suspect this problem will be faced at most tables so my goal is to beat those who hold my cards. With my loser-count it seems unlikely for a passed hand partner to cover them all and my goal on this hand is a plus score of any kind So I will pass 3C as expectancy suggests partner to hold 6-7 points, we don’t have a major suit fit, I have too many losers for a minor suit game, they know what to lead against NT, and maybe the best reason of all - weak hands play better in their suit.
"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."
0

#5 User is offline   AL78 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,213
  • Joined: 2019-October-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SE England
  • Interests:Bridge, hiking, cycling, gardening, weight training

Posted 2021-August-11, 09:44

This was the full deal:



Partner didn't know what to do and blasted 5♣, not a success going four off for a bottom on the ♦T lead (eight tricks are there double dummy). One pair found the making 3NT (I have no idea how). One North made nine tricks in 5♣ and one North went three off in 4♣. I don't think I played it right, I should not take the club finesse and instead cash the ace before crossing to hand then play to the queen, East then doesn't get a diamond ruff (me not planning carefully enough again).

I suggested if she really wants to bid again perhaps 3♦ would have been better, and I haven't guarenteed a five card suit. If I had shown the diamonds instead of the clubs we somewhat land on our feet, 10 tricks are available in a diamond contract, so we only go one off if she raises to game.
0

#6 User is offline   mikl_plkcc 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 720
  • Joined: 2008-November-20
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:sailing, bridge

Posted 2021-August-19, 09:14

I will X then bid 3♦ over 3♣, suggesting a strong hand with 5 ♦.
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