benlessard Posted August 1, 2006 Report Share Posted August 1, 2006 I was suprised by Frances response so ive asked around to players in Montreal and the consensus was the following. 7-8 solid in the bid minorsure stopper in spades.at least half a stopper in the other minor.Probably a stiff in opener suit. around 15 pts. Some did argue that the stiff in partner suit is almost mandatory since a doubleton and a ruffing value make 4H or 6H a possible contract. All the player ive asked said that they would never bid 3nt with 3 aces or 18 pts axxaxxakqxxxx 1c--1h--???All of them thought 2d was obvious The more i think about it the more i prefer the sure stopper in the other minor because opponent didnt overcall spades so they are more likely to have diamonds then spades. Im not saying this way is much better then the other just that i find there is a major style difference here worth discussing with your partner. on one side its a tactical bid"right siding" the contract putting the defense on a tough spot reaching a good game with slight valuesbut possibly losing the 6 first trick The frequency is a bit higher on the other side its a sure thing contract but "wrong siding" the contract. (in matchpts)telling the defense to lead heartsforcing you to bid 3 clubs with minimum values but with a long suitsmissing some cold gamesprobably a easy for some slamslower frequency Ben Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeh Posted August 1, 2006 Report Share Posted August 1, 2006 I was suprised by Frances response so ive asked around to players in Montreal and the consensus was the following. 7-8 solid in the bid minorsure stopper in spades.at least half a stopper in the other minor.Probably a stiff in opener suit. around 15 pts. Some did argue that the stiff in partner suit is almost mandatory since a doubleton and a ruffing value make 4H or 6H a possible contract. All the player ive asked said that they would never bid 3nt with 3 aces or 18 pts axxaxxakqxxxx 1c--1h--???All of them thought 2d was obvious The more i think about it the more i prefer the sure stopper in the other minor because opponent didnt overcall spades so they are more likely to have diamonds then spades. Im not saying this way is much better then the other just that i find there is a major style difference here worth discussing with your partner. on one side its a tactical bid"right siding" the contract putting the defense on a tough spot reaching a good game with slight valuesbut possibly losing the 6 first trick The frequency is a bit higher on the other side its a sure thing contract but "wrong siding" the contract. (in matchpts)telling the defense to lead heartsforcing you to bid 3 clubs with minimum values but with a long suitsmissing some cold gamesprobably a easy for some slamslower frequency BenI don't know which players you asked in Montreal, but I have played a lot with Doug and Sandra Fraser, two of the leading montreal players before they moved out west a few years back and have been teammates with several of the top Montreal players... and I would be astounded if the top players had a consensus that 3N showed Kx x Qxx AKQxxxx :) That is a perfectly normal 3♣ rebid, and I frankly can't understand why one would not make that bid. And I disagree with your assessment of the gains and losses from the two approaches. Jumping to 3N on your hand strikes me as making constructive bidding virtually impossible, and will lead to a lot of minuses when modest pluses were available. OTOH, bidding Roland, Frances, I and others prefer affords a clear description of one's hand, making partner's job easy (he doesn't have to pass with xxxx in ♥ if he has outside values, you know) and I see no resaon why using this approach should lead to missing any games. When I open 1♣ and jump rebid 3♣, I don't miss many games in my partnerships. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benlessard Posted August 2, 2006 Report Share Posted August 2, 2006 IMHO the problems with bidding 3c with kx xqxxakqxxxx is that partner will pass with hands that you would want to be in 3nt. xxxxaJ9xjxxxx you might wrongside 3nt. 3 clubs is not my favorite matchpoint contract and in imps i prefer to have 25% of making game then 50% of making partscore. I think that on a long run 3nt is highly likely to be the best spot on most deal and that by going the fast way you maximise your chance of making it wheter its a good or bad contract. as for axxxaxakqjxxx most says its a 2c--2d waiting ---3nt (not 25-27 bal but a long solid minors and ready to go down like a man) I think its positive bridge to bid games that could be could be off the first 5 tricks but where you keep the defense on a tough spot at trick 1 and 2. Im sure most world class player make their bread and butter by bidding low HCP game and making them not by settling for small plus when game is only 30%. Anyway ill keep asking there is plenty of top players in Montreal so im sure ill get some interesting answers. Ben 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.