Guest Jlall Posted October 10, 2005 Report Share Posted October 10, 2005 Dealer, non vul vs. vul♠ 72♥ 102♦ J97643♣ Q104 Why is it that the "obvious" 3♦ opening didn't cross my mind? Roland Clear 3D roland, not sure what you were thinking ;) lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blofeld Posted October 10, 2005 Report Share Posted October 10, 2005 While I can see the merits of opening 4♦ with that hand, I think that opposite an unpassed hand this is a bit much (you could be missing 3NT!), and we conservative juniors will restrict ourselves to a simple middle-of-the-road 3♦. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerben42 Posted October 10, 2005 Report Share Posted October 10, 2005 About Ed Hoogenkamp (Altocampo) Actually he hadn't been a junior for some years when he wrote it. I've played the "3 weaker than 2" style for a while and liked it. But then I moved to another country and didn't get many followers of this style ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jlall Posted October 10, 2005 Report Share Posted October 10, 2005 Well, partner will never play you for this strong of a hand for a 3D bid at this vulnerability, so you will probably miss 3N anyways. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walddk Posted October 10, 2005 Report Share Posted October 10, 2005 While I can see the merits of opening 4♦ with that hand, I think that opposite an unpassed hand this is a bit much (you could be missing 3NT!), and we conservative juniors will restrict ourselves to a simple middle-of-the-road 3♦. Glad you didn't treat as a solid suit. Partner must know your style. 3NT was enough for him, holding AxxAxxAKxAxxx It had no play on a spade lead when diamonds broke 3-1 (no queen singleton). Was he disappointed to go down? I'll ask him one of these days. Roland Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted October 10, 2005 Report Share Posted October 10, 2005 While I can see the merits of opening 4♦ with that hand, I think that opposite an unpassed hand this is a bit much (you could be missing 3NT!), and we conservative juniors will restrict ourselves to a simple middle-of-the-road 3♦. Glad you didn't treat as a solid suit. Partner must know your style. 3NT was enough for him, holding AxxAxxAKxAxxx It had no play on a spade lead when diamonds broke 3-1 (no queen singleton). Was he disappointed to go down? I'll ask him one of these days. Roland Enjoy the discussion, but what's your point here Roland? Would you prefer not to be in 3NT with these hands? I think that 3D as weaker than 2D is certainly playable, and I hate playing against people who preempt this much at favorable vulnerability. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walddk Posted October 10, 2005 Report Share Posted October 10, 2005 Enjoy the discussion, but what's your point here Roland? Would you prefer not to be in 3NT with these hands? I think that 3D as weaker than 2D is certainly playable, and I hate playing against people who preempt this much at favorable vulnerability. Of course I want to be in a 3NT that has roughly 53% chance of making. My point is that I would never open 3♦. Call it lack of imagination if you like. Because if I do with that hand, what am I going to bid on xxxxxKQ10xxxxx 4♦? 3NT broken minor? Pass? 3♦?. If the latter, how is partner supposed to judge? Roland Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdano Posted October 10, 2005 Report Share Posted October 10, 2005 Enjoy the discussion, but what's your point here Roland? Would you prefer not to be in 3NT with these hands? I think that 3D as weaker than 2D is certainly playable, and I hate playing against people who preempt this much at favorable vulnerability. Of course I want to be in a 3NT that has roughly 53% chance of making. My point is that I would never open 3♦. Call it lack of imagination if you like. Because if I do with that hand, what am I going to bid on xxxxxKQ10xxxxx 4♦? 3NT broken minor? Pass? 3♦?. If the latter, how is partner supposed to judge? Roland You could reread the text you are quoting, and then open 2♦. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walddk Posted October 10, 2005 Report Share Posted October 10, 2005 You could reread the text you are quoting, and then open 2♦. I wish I could when I have a hand like that, but that would be a misdiscription, given that it shows 4-7 hcp and 5-6 hearts or spades. Roland Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdano Posted October 10, 2005 Report Share Posted October 10, 2005 Roland, you are getting silly. Some here are discussing whether a style where 3D is weaker than 2D (obviously both implying long diamonds) makes sense. You answer first by saying that opening these weak hands 3D in your style would lead to silly results. Then you go on saying that 2D would be something else in your system.If you have nothing to add to this discussion, then why reply? Arend Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLOGIC Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 Weird I had a hand like this recently and I doubled. Double is automatic, I got this wrong. Edit: Didn't see Fred bid 4H...that's pretty nasty actually. I guess I should say "bidding is automatic" since 4H could be > X 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.