badderzboy Posted January 4, 2006 Report Share Posted January 4, 2006 [hv=d=n&v=n&s=s103h4da643cakj1043]133|100|[/hv] Opps held this hand - what would u do? Steve Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finch Posted January 4, 2006 Report Share Posted January 4, 2006 3♣ natural and forcing.I honestly cannot think of a sane alternative. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P_Marlowe Posted January 4, 2006 Report Share Posted January 4, 2006 Hi, if you play lebensohl, sell the hand as strong with clubs. You cant invite, playing MP, you could also settle for 3C, which rates to be better, 5C is a long way to go. Marlowe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joker_gib Posted January 4, 2006 Report Share Posted January 4, 2006 I bid 2NT transfer to 3♣ and then 3NT showing a hand that wants to play 3NT without stopper. If I don't have this agreement, I bid as Frances said : 3♣, natural and forcing Alain Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toothbrush Posted January 4, 2006 Report Share Posted January 4, 2006 3♣ natural, GF Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jlall Posted January 4, 2006 Report Share Posted January 4, 2006 3♣ natural and forcing.I honestly cannot think of a sane alternative. My thoughts exactly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcphee Posted January 4, 2006 Report Share Posted January 4, 2006 3C natural and F. 2S is natural with S and not only do I have no S stop I have another flaw with the stiff H. This hand could make many C or NT I am not sure but bidding 3C does not prevent me from reaching 3N. Most play fast arrival denies the S stop with 3N. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeh Posted January 4, 2006 Report Share Posted January 4, 2006 As the poll indicates, the answer depends on system. Thus, if I played a natural method, I would agree with Frances and Justin. I prefer a transfer method (not lebensohl) in which 2N is a transfer to 3♣, over which I could force with 3♦, showing gf values with 4♦ and longer ♣, or I could cue 3♠ to deny a stopper, while confirming long ♣ and gf values. The first sequence would be more attractive with better ♦: I really do not want to suggest a high-level ♦ contract opposite Qxxx, for example. But neither do I want to virtually insist on 3N opposite a ♠ stopper, given my ♥ shortness. On balance, I bid 2N (in my methods) then 3♠, but I am uncomfortable with it. 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.