Kalvan14 Posted October 21, 2005 Report Share Posted October 21, 2005 would anyone consider bidding: 1♠-2♦-4♣?4 ♣ is a splinter bid, with ♦ fit. Since everyone appears to agree that North hand is not strong enough to bid 3♦ (13 HCP, 4 trumps, a singleton, no wasted value is "not strong enough"?), 4♣ appears to be the most descriptive bids (btw, South, hearing the misfit in ♣ and seeing the misfit in ♠ will be quite happy to stop in 5♦). As an aside, this sequence (1M-2♦) or the other one (1♠-2♥) is perfect to play 2N by opener as lebensohl (or bad/good). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tysen2k Posted October 21, 2005 Report Share Posted October 21, 2005 would anyone consider bidding: 1♠-2♦-4♣?I wouldn't since it gives up on spades. I would probably bid 3♦ at IMPs and 2♠ at MP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
junyi_zhu Posted October 21, 2005 Report Share Posted October 21, 2005 Please answer this using the 2/1 methods advocated by Mike Lawrence, not Max Hardy. Please don't answer "in my own system ..." 1. Lawrence uses Strong Jump Shifts. 2. 1♦ - 2♣ is not a game force, just forcing to 2NT or 3 of a minor. 3. 1M - 2x is a 95% agme force but may stop in 4 of a minor if no fit is found and 3NT isn't playable [hv=d=n&v=n&n=sak9842haqd8543c4&s=shj96daqj76ckq732]133|200|Scoring: IMP[/hv] 1♠ - 2♦ (Would you ever bid 2♣ instead of 2♦?)??? What should North bid? 2♠ or 3♦? 1♠ - 2♦3♦ - ??? Do you look for NT or a ♦ game/slam? If you have a systemic way to show 6th spade, extra value, you should show it first instead of 3D I believe. You may easily belong to 4S. This hand is easy to handle in my 2/1 scheme, but I won't talk about it. In Lawrence's scheme, it is also biddable. 1S 2D 2S 3C3D 3H(on the way to 3NT)3N Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdeegan Posted October 23, 2005 Report Share Posted October 23, 2005 :) 4♣ A splinter bid with a potentially powerful hand. It works here by exposing the duplication in the club suit, and we can stop at 5♦. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winstonm Posted October 23, 2005 Report Share Posted October 23, 2005 A disadvantage of Lawrence's methods is that a 2S rebid does not show a 6 card suit, so rebidding 2S is not a good solution unless you also want to bid 3S and wait to show any diamond support. It gets a little cloudy, but I believe Lawrence's methods look first for the best game so this auction is passable: 1S-2D3D-4C4S- My understanding is that this is an attempt to play 4S and not a diamond cue bid, which could work out well if the hands were: AKQ9xxxKxxxAx xxQxAQJxxKQxx Note that if opener held AKQ9x, Kx, xxxx, Ax, the "proper" rebid according to Lawrence would be 2N to show the unbid stoppers. Lawrence's methods utilize a lot of negative inference along with some strict structure. I am comfortable playing his style, but I don't espouse it as the best or for everyone. I think it's best to pick the 2/1 style that matches your own beliefs about bidding and go from there. But then I'm neither Canadian nor Danish, so what do I know? Winston Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalvan14 Posted October 24, 2005 Report Share Posted October 24, 2005 would anyone consider bidding: 1♠-2♦-4♣?I wouldn't since it gives up on spades. I would probably bid 3♦ at IMPs and 2♠ at MP. I don't think we would loose ♠ for game: 4♠ over 4♣ (splinter) is 99% a choice of contract. We might loose ♠ for slam, but I am almost sure that slam in ♦ would be likely to be better than slam in ♠.In this particular case, it clarifies the misfit. 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.