Echognome Posted January 27, 2006 Report Share Posted January 27, 2006 [hv=d=e&v=n&s=sq73hdt52cat96432]133|100|Scoring: XIMP(2♠)* - P - (P) - 4♦**(P) - ?[/hv]*Weak 2**Leaping Michael's ♦ and ♥ What now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr1303 Posted January 27, 2006 Report Share Posted January 27, 2006 Uggh, horrible hand. 5D, and hope partner doesn't bid 6. Hopefully this is the least encouraging bid I can make. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MickyB Posted January 27, 2006 Report Share Posted January 27, 2006 I'm confused... 4♦ is forcingI am 0-3 in my partner's suitsIf partner bids 6♦ over 5♦, I hope he doesn't make an overtrick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerben42 Posted January 27, 2006 Report Share Posted January 27, 2006 5♦ looks enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr1303 Posted January 27, 2006 Report Share Posted January 27, 2006 4D is forcing? What am I meant to do with: xxxxxxxxxxxxx ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdano Posted January 27, 2006 Report Share Posted January 27, 2006 4D is forcing? What am I meant to do with: xxxxxxxxxxxxx ? For me it's forcing by agreement. But with the given hand, wouldn't you prefer 4♥ over 4♦ anyway? If it goes down, the score is the same, but if partner happens to have a monster and make it...or go down one, at least opps were sweating... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al_U_Card Posted January 27, 2006 Report Share Posted January 27, 2006 Interesting agreement. Pard is expecting a random 7 count and you can provide him with a C trick and some H ruffs (They should lead trumps on this "preference" auction. If they do, you may well have trouble making 4...) I would pass and hope for a plus given the lack of S support by RHO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finch Posted January 27, 2006 Report Share Posted January 27, 2006 I also think it's forcing.I raise to five and hope it doesn't make an overtrick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luis Posted January 27, 2006 Report Share Posted January 27, 2006 5♦ no other choice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeh Posted January 27, 2006 Report Share Posted January 27, 2006 5♦. Passing a forcing bid is a bad idea at the best of times, and I have no idea why anyone thinks we are in trouble here. Partner is, literally, unlimited. It is unlikely but possible that he will raise 5♦ to 6. While I do not expect A AKxxxx AKQxxx void, neither do I rule it out. When partner makes an unlimited forcing bid, his hand is literally unlimited. If he can't make 5♦ opposite the hand I hold, then he probably stretched to bid 4♦. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finch Posted January 27, 2006 Report Share Posted January 27, 2006 I though the original problem was whether we should be making a slam try here!After all,-KQJxxAKxxxxKx only needs one of the minors breaking 2-2. Our spade length is such that partner probably has a singleton, however, which puts me off. Give me a fourth diamond, and things are - of course - totally different (it then becomes quite close to a slam force). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al_U_Card Posted January 27, 2006 Report Share Posted January 27, 2006 Even tho I have it on my cc and have had it employed against me a few times, I have never used it nor had partner use it. Is the general agreement that it is forcing? (To 4 of the major? or what?) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pclayton Posted January 27, 2006 Report Share Posted January 27, 2006 Leaping Michaels can be played as 'moderate': x, AQxxx, AKJxx, xx or 'strong': ---AKJTx, AQJxxx, xx. There's been some articles that advocate the former, but I think the more prevalent use is to play it as a strong hand and forcing to 4 of the major. With the subject hand I bid 5♦ and hope it fetches. With no spade raise, my club A is probably hitting a void, and theres a lot of work to get to 11 tricks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeh Posted January 27, 2006 Report Share Posted January 27, 2006 Even tho I have it on my cc and have had it employed against me a few times, I have never used it nor had partner use it. Is the general agreement that it is forcing? (To 4 of the major? or what?)I have used it a number of times in several partnerships. In all cases we have used it as forcing: it promises an expectation of game opposite an reasonable poor hand opposite: so it is a strong bid, forcing to game in one of the suits. I have never seen it discussed as 'moderate' and my view would be that such a style is unplayable in the long run. Firstly, you will generate too many minuses, and secondly, how do you handle the big hands? Doubling then bidding is fine with big 3-suited or one-suited hands but very poor for powerful 2-suiters, since your second suit gets lost. Furthermore, when in direct seat, you have to cater to the possibility that LHO will raise opener at the 4-level, thus completely destroying your ability to show this awkard yet slam-potential hand. And you cannot play Leaping Michaels as 'both ways', for obvious reasons. So with the moderate hand, make a simple major suit overcall, which is hardly a sign of weakness B) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blofeld Posted January 27, 2006 Report Share Posted January 27, 2006 5♦ seems practical. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Echognome Posted January 27, 2006 Author Report Share Posted January 27, 2006 Perhaps it would have been more interesting to ask whether to leaping michael's on partner's (my) hand. ♠A♥KT743♦AK983♣K7 I actually chose double (I wasn't sure we were playing leaping michael's and didn't want to risk a total disaster.) Partner bid 2NT (lebensohl) and I reluctantly complied with 3♣ making +170 when clubs split 2-2. At all the other tables, NS played in either 5♣ or 3NT after East initially passed. West then opened 1♥ and the North hands had a different problem. Most chose 1NT to end in 3NT. As you can see, clubs is a much better strain than NT. 5♦ is also making as diamonds are 3-2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blofeld Posted January 27, 2006 Report Share Posted January 27, 2006 Over a double I would have bid 3♣ with your partner's hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joshs Posted January 27, 2006 Report Share Posted January 27, 2006 Perhaps it would have been more interesting to ask whether to leaping michael's on partner's (my) hand. ♠A♥KT743♦AK983♣K7 I actually chose double (I wasn't sure we were playing leaping michael's and didn't want to risk a total disaster.) Partner bid 2NT (lebensohl) and I reluctantly complied with 3♣ making +170 when clubs split 2-2. At all the other tables, NS played in either 5♣ or 3NT after East initially passed. West then opened 1♥ and the North hands had a different problem. Most chose 1NT to end in 3NT. As you can see, clubs is a much better strain than NT. 5♦ is also making as diamonds are 3-2. Hmm. Over 4D I would bid 5D and prey we are not missing a slam (in one of the minors), but there will be a lot of handling on this hand. With your actual hand I would have xed then bid 3H to show a strong flexible hand (I think your suit quality is wrong for 4D). Partner would certainly insist on at least 5C on that sequence. Actually, with the 7 club hand I would bid 5C over the x not 2N. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finch Posted January 28, 2006 Report Share Posted January 28, 2006 Perhaps it would have been more interesting to ask whether to leaping michael's on partner's (my) hand. ♠A♥KT743♦AK983♣K7 I actually chose double (I wasn't sure we were playing leaping michael's and didn't want to risk a total disaster.) Partner bid 2NT (lebensohl) and I reluctantly complied with 3♣ making +170 when clubs split 2-2. Your partner spent too long counting his points ("only 6") and not enough time looking at his hand. He has closer to a game force after a take-out double than to a 3C sign-off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Posted January 28, 2006 Report Share Posted January 28, 2006 5♦, which is no slam interest at all... 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.