Finanzier

How would you open following hand and why? Which bid would you never take? ♠- ♥AKxx ♦x ♣B109876xx

♥Thank you for your comments. I agree, that 5NT is better to investigate grand. If I bid 6♥ I can equal well close with 6♠, but the bidding picture 3♥-4♥-5♥-6♥ was too tempting :rolleyes:

The next hand ended in disaster. [hv=pc=n&s=sk653ha6dq5cajt98&w=st4hkqj8532dt96c6&n=sa87hdkj74ckq5432&e=sqj92ht974da832c7&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=3h4h5h6hp7cdppp]399|300[/hv] Obviously something was wrong. I as South thought North would show at least 5-5 in spades and a minor and expected a 6♠ bid not 7 ♣. My partner claimed that 4 ♥would only show a chicane in heart, and so would be bid internationally. Apart from the fact that my 6 heart bid was showish, which of us two was wrong? Or were we both erroneous?

Seit einigen Wochen kann ich BBO nur über ein neues Design spielen. Das Alte bot mir die Möglichkeit, Hände zu analysieren, die Reizung zu ändern, Karten auszutauschen. Geht das mit dem Neuen auch noch? Ich habe nichts gefunden.

No. N has to have the exact right values with a ♥doubleton. I dont think his 4♦promises such a good hand, its competitive. The insistence on the ♥-color with concealment of the ♣-color can lead to a partnership-like detuning.

Thank you for your opinion. I was a bit surprised, because so many prefer the rubber over a possible Schlemm. And many see it as me that these special 22 points are too much for 2NT. The south hand is an excellent proof of that.

4 ♣ were a Transfer to ♦. It was rubber, we led 1:1 with 40 to 0. I was N. But we do not play for money. If there was a slam, we should be in. 13 tricks in ♦ or NT [hv=pc=n&s=sk63h7dj9876532c2&n=sa72hak52dak4ca64]133|200[/hv] Who did wrong? Should I have opened 2 ♦ (SEF)?

[hv=pc=n&s=sk63h7dj9876532c2&d=n&v=n&b=5&a=2np4cp4dp]133|200[/hv] What is the appropriate level? What would you do?

I bid an system showing points. If I get an 2♦ answer (0-3 Points) I hope for xxxx,xxx,xxx,xxx with easy 10 tricks.

Pass. P didn't want to let me try Blackwood. With outside values he should have bid different. So I count 8 tricks in !C and my both aces for ten. There might come a trick 11 from anywhere but I am aware to go one down in five.

The strength of a suit is nearly never the deciding factor. In a reasonable contract the nasty distribution of the opps might bring us down, the 4-1 breaks and the unfavourable position of the high cards. Mostly the side high cards were more significant than the trump high cards. I remember a nice 7-1 fit with 10xxxxxx made 4 ♥, while the opps complained about the injustice. But I dont agree. In my youth barraging with KQ10xxx and a side king my partner had AJxx with a flat hand without side tricks and he was so proud like me desperate : "What do you think, what would happen, if the opps had this cards?" "They would run in a slam", I anwered. A and Jack in the right side suit together with 2 smalll trumps would have suited me much better. Bidding 1 ♠ with this hand lets the bidding fluent. P can assume otherwise, that your 1NT bid denies 4 ♠. The trust in the bidding is from great value. The prize that P attacks sometimes with the King from ♠Kx I pay. Dont forget that you have to make a non-perfect bid because the hand is non-perfect. You have to pay sometimes whatever you do.

2♣ had the disadvantage - beside that P will expect more defense tricks - that the opps might go in and mess up terrible the situation so much that the situation is unrecognizable. For you clearness is desirable. You want silent opps or at least not wild bidding opps. 1♦ has some sympathy. You bid the suit you need something. If you get a !D raise it helps much. But if you prefer strict major bids you will later hardly convince P from your nice ♥. So best seem me the honest 1 ♥. Ok, only the suit is honest, but it helps judging whatever P and the opps do. Even if unlikely all pass it might not bad for you.

Do not see any problem. You bid your first 3 card-suit, 1♥.

P has more than one stop in so my ♥ are usefull. He has 5-6 fast tricks. So we need more than 2♦ tricks. But he has probably 2♦cards at most, judging after his carefully 2NT. If he has only a single, we are doomed, if he has a doubleton, he has to duck and the attacked suit has to stand. Beside bad ♦ standing. But 2NT is in any case not wishable so I will try 3NT with the expectation of a collapse. The alternate 3♦ may even be worse than 2NT.