BPO-007F

[inquiry]

[hv=d=n&v=n&s=shakq854dak63cq75]133|100|Scoring: Chicago

BPO-007F

 

West North East South

----   1♣ -  (3♠)  - ?[/hv]

[HeartA]

4♠.

[hrothgar]

BPO-007F: Double

 

I HATE this bid. If partner converts for penalties were headed for a zero. Balanced against this, all my other options are worse. The lowest unambiguously forcing bid that I have available is 4S and this burns an amazing amount fo bidding space. Equally significant, the vulnerability suggests that partner may very well decide to bid 3NT holding Spades. As Al Roth famously said, "if I can survive this bid, I'll be well positioned"

[mike777]

5NT

 

Converting 7clubs to 7H and hoping p does not convert to 7NT with spade Ace.

 

Btw, double second choice, very tough. Partner may convert this bid also :).

[han]

I considered Dbl, 4S, 5H, 5NT and 6H. I don't believe that partner would ever pick hearts over 5NT so I rejected that one. I also want to force to slam, so I rejected 5H, and also double which seemed to risky (though Richard makes a good case for it). So the choice was between 4S and 6H, and I chose 4S because 6H is too unilateral. perhaps partner will do something unexpected over 4S.

 

 

As an aside, this is a great auction for switch. Wouldn't it be nice to bid 4D showing hearts?!

[whereagles]

6♥. My lack of imagination forces me to make this bid :)

[Walddk]

4♠ is the only way you can set clubs in my methods, and the hand is not suited for that although clubs could well be the final destination. Therefore, I went for something else in order to keep all options open. No one has suggested that bid yet, so let's wait a little.

 

Roland

[mikeh]

4♠ is the only way you can set clubs in my methods, and the hand is not suited for that although clubs could well be the final destination. Therefore, I went for something else in order to keep all options open. No one has suggested that bid yet, so let's wait a little.

 

Roland

Don't tell me you passed, Roland? :)

 

Did you bid 5♠? I agree that 4♠ unambiguously sets ♣ as trump and that that is inappropriate.

 

5N would be GSF in ♣, I think: not two places to play nor choice of slams

 

I considered 5N, intending to convert 7♣ to 7♥, but I have no idea that 7♥ is playable even opposite AKx(x)(x) of ♣. I don't like shooting for grands when an entirely forseeable dummy will give me very little or even zero chance:

 

KJxx xx Jxx AKxx: I need a great deal of luck to make 7♥ and he might well have a stiff ♥.

 

If 4♠ sets ♣, and 4N is keycard over 3♠, and 5N is GSF, what is 5♠??? I'd worry it was exclusion.

 

But maybe if you bid 5♠ and then convert 6♣ to 6♥, partner can visualize your hand?? I would admire any partnership that got that right :D

[whereagles]

5N would be GSF in ♣, I think

What do you need GSF for, if you have RKCB available?

[mikeh]

5N would be GSF in ♣, I think

What do you need GSF for, if you have RKCB available?

because you own a void :)

 

Here, it is a ♠ void but give yourself Axx AKQJx void Qxxxx and you would need GSF (as one example)

[han]

With my f2f partner 5NT would definitely pick a slam, not GSF. Of course, I have no idea what it is in BBO advanced.

[Al_U_Card]

Is 4H not forcing?

[mikeh]

Is 4H not forcing?

4♥ is not forcing in any partnership I have played in. There will be hands on which responder is stretching even to bid game, and lacks the defence to risk doubling (which may be passed)

[han]

No, 4♥ is not forcing.

[Walddk]

What do you need GSF for, if you have RKCB available?

You have, I have not. 4NT is not ace asking as I play it. You never have a hand where your only problem is how many key cards partner has. Use 4NT for something better, like two possibly three places to play.

 

Roland

[luis]

What do you need GSF for, if you have RKCB available?

You have, I have not. 4NT is not ace asking as I play it. You never have a hand where your only problem is how many key cards partner has. Use 4NT for something better, like two possibly three places to play.

 

Roland

You have it I don't have it.... This is not the purpose of the polls or is it? I mean we are supossed to be playing BBO-advanced as if we had agreed with pd to play that and then we have to solve the bidding situations posted.

When BBO-advanced doesn't cover the meaning of a bid we are supossed to use judgement and logic to bid.

 

So comments like "4nt is this or 4s shows that" are completely meaningless I'm not interested at all in what 4NT or 4♠ is when you play with your pd, I'm interested in what you would bid at the table with the posted conditions. The idea of the polls is to show how experts use judgement to determine the best bid available not as an interview about what each of us play with our pds.

 

Note: This is not 100% for you Roland I assume you are saying you expect 4NT to be 3 places to play in this situation which is reasonable but many posters are showing a tendency of saying things like "with my pd I play that xx means yy" and I don't know the rest but I'm really not interested in such responses.

 

Luis

[Walddk]

What do you need GSF for, if you have RKCB available?

You have, I have not. 4NT is not ace asking as I play it. You never have a hand where your only problem is how many key cards partner has. Use 4NT for something better, like two possibly three places to play.

 

Roland

You have it I don't have it.... This is not the purpose of the polls or is it? I mean we are supossed to be playing BBO-advanced as if we had agreed with pd to play that and then we have to solve the bidding situations posted.

When BBO-advanced doesn't cover the meaning of a bid we are supossed to use judgement and logic to bid.

 

So comments like "4nt is this or 4s shows that" are completely meaningless I'm not interested at all in what 4NT or 4♠ is when you play with your pd, I'm interested in what you would bid at the table with the posted conditions. The idea of the polls is to show how experts use judgement to determine the best bid available not as an interview about what each of us play with our pds.

 

Note: This is not 100% for you Roland I assume you are saying you expect 4NT to be 3 places to play in this situation which is reasonable but many posters are showing a tendency of saying things like "with my pd I play that xx means yy" and I don't know the rest but I'm really not interested in such responses.

 

Luis

I agree with all you are saying, Luis, but the problem is that the continuation with a hand like this is a matter of partnership agreement, not about judgement. What is 4♠, 4NT, 5NT, whatever? BBO Advanced doesn't tell you, so it's all a question about what you agreed on.

 

With this said, I think it's perfectly legitimate to state what you think is the best method for you and your partner. 4NT is not ace asking unless it's 100% obvious that trump is set. It's not in this case.

 

Roland

[luis]

What do you need GSF for, if you have RKCB available?

You have, I have not. 4NT is not ace asking as I play it. You never have a hand where your only problem is how many key cards partner has. Use 4NT for something better, like two possibly three places to play.

 

Roland

You have it I don't have it.... This is not the purpose of the polls or is it? I mean we are supossed to be playing BBO-advanced as if we had agreed with pd to play that and then we have to solve the bidding situations posted.

When BBO-advanced doesn't cover the meaning of a bid we are supossed to use judgement and logic to bid.

 

So comments like "4nt is this or 4s shows that" are completely meaningless I'm not interested at all in what 4NT or 4♠ is when you play with your pd, I'm interested in what you would bid at the table with the posted conditions. The idea of the polls is to show how experts use judgement to determine the best bid available not as an interview about what each of us play with our pds.

 

Note: This is not 100% for you Roland I assume you are saying you expect 4NT to be 3 places to play in this situation which is reasonable but many posters are showing a tendency of saying things like "with my pd I play that xx means yy" and I don't know the rest but I'm really not interested in such responses.

 

Luis

I agree with all you are saying, Luis, but the problem is that the continuation with a hand like this is a matter of partnership agreement, not about judgement. What is 4♠, 4NT, 5NT, whatever? BBO Advanced doesn't tell you, so it's all a question about what you agreed on.

 

With this said, I think it's perfectly legitimate to state what you think is the best method for you and your partner.

 

Roland

This problem is interesting precisely because you have no agreement with pd.

You just forgot to talk about the 1♣ (3♠) situation and now what?

I'm not interested at all in any agreements I'm interested in what would you do without agreements.

 

Luis

[mikeh]

Roland, I would agree that logically 4N could be used as 2 or 3 places to play. I disagree with your 'never' needing keycard: x AKQ AK Qxxxxxx is a somewhat improbable example, but I think you'd agree that a keycard ask is the only sensible bid here, if only it were available.

 

It comes down to frequency of occurence and degree of necessity when the situation in question arises. Either situation will be so infrequent that an active player may go for years without encountering either one, and our perceptions of relative frequency will be entirely subjective (assuming we have not tried to run simulations).

 

However, as Luis points out, we are answering a poll and the given method, understandably, contains no direction for us. My guess, and it is only that, and is informed only by my personal experience of other players, is that the majority of players would assume that a jump to 4N here would be keycard. Whether, on consideration, that is the best use for the bid is open to question, just as whether the best use of 5N here is GSF or, as Hannie prefers, takeout. The fact that Hannie thinks 5N is takeout and you 4N shows that it is dangerous to impose our opinions on these questions. Of course, I am doing precisely that when I assert that 4N is keycard and 5N is GSF :D :) B) .

[pclayton]

For me, 5N would definitely be pick-a-slam. 4♠ followed by 5N would be GSF.

 

I think I answered 6♥. It is a lock that the opponents will sac in 6♠ anyway, so whatever we try, it should be in preparation for an intelligent auction at the 6 and 7 level.

 

Perhaps 4♠ is better.......

[Walddk]

I'm not interested at all in any agreements I'm interested in what would you do without agreements.

 

Luis

I can't play bridge without agreements. Can you? Guessing is not my kind of game. "Guessing" actually exists (invented in Denmark). It's a fun game, but it has nothing to do with bridge.

 

Roland

[luis]

I'm not interested at all in any agreements I'm interested in what would you do without agreements.

 

Luis

I can't play bridge without agreements. Can you? Guessing is not my kind of game. "Guessing" actually exists (invented in Denmark). It's a fun game, but it has nothing to do with bridge.

 

Roland

Imagine you are lurking around in a bridge club you are asked to play a duplicate team match with a player you just can't say no. Unfortunately the match is just starting so your pd just says "BBO-advanced and std carding and the rest just use judgement ok?" you start saying something about not being able to play without agreements specially about 3♠ overcalls over 1 of a minor but the cards are dealt, pd opens 1♣, rho overcalls 3♠ and you have the hand of the problem. Now what? Do you raise from the chair and abandon the game?

 

Cmon Roland, you may not like this problem and I may not like others but please accept the conditions and follow the rules. If you think you can never play with a player without an agreement about this very specific position you can always abstain. In fact if your vote was based in agreements that the conditions clearly say we don't have you should ask your vote to be nullified since you are voting a different problem.

 

Luis

[Walddk]

Then I would bid 6♥ with a shrug. Punting is probably best, and if it's not, I'll apologise afterwards when we go down with 7♣ or 7♦ rigid.

 

Roland

[hrothgar]

My understanding is that these polls are (in part) intended to help extend the set of agreements comprising BBO Advanced.

 

I see nothing wrong with players imposing their own agreements regarding undefined bids so long as they believe that these should "obviously" be incorporated as part of the system.

[luke warm]

i doubled to complete my sweep