mike777 Posted August 16, 2006 Report Share Posted August 16, 2006 [hv=d=s&v=e&s=st72hkj3daqj2cq74]133|100|Scoring: IMP1D=(2S)=X=P?[/hv] Your call and why? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hrothgar Posted August 16, 2006 Report Share Posted August 16, 2006 2NT would seem most flexible Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inquiry Posted August 16, 2006 Report Share Posted August 16, 2006 This is the kind of hand that give negative doubles a bad name... :-) 3♣ - and not happy about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted August 16, 2006 Report Share Posted August 16, 2006 This is the kind of hand that give negative doubles a bad name... :-) Only if you get picky about stoppers. Otherwise it's a very easy 2NT bid :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hrothgar Posted August 16, 2006 Report Share Posted August 16, 2006 This is the kind of hand that give negative doubles a bad name... :-) Only if you get picky about stoppers. Otherwise it's a very easy 2NT bid :lol: Please note: I voted for 2NT, however, I think that this should be some kind of scramble rather than a natural bid... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted August 16, 2006 Report Share Posted August 16, 2006 Funny you mention it. I also think it's probably better used as artificial (e.g. Lebenshol), in which case we'd be in a dilemma similar to Ben's. I've seen some local top players playing that way. If 2NT is Lebenshol, I guess one would have to try 2NT (min hand, pard can pass if he's inspired) followed by pass to 3♣ and hope for the best. This style forces responder to be a bit more strict when it comes to negative doubles. Having both unbid suits is a necessity unless the hand is game-forcing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apollo81 Posted August 16, 2006 Report Share Posted August 16, 2006 [hv=d=s&v=e&s=st72hkj3daqj2cq74]133|100|Scoring: IMP1D=(2S)=X=P?[/hv] Your call and why? 2NT, and happy to be NV Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Posted August 16, 2006 Report Share Posted August 16, 2006 This is the kind of hand that give negative doubles a bad name... :-) Only if you get picky about stoppers. Otherwise it's a very easy 2NT bid :) Please note: I voted for 2NT, however, I think that this should be some kind of scramble rather than a natural bid... agree Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pbleighton Posted August 17, 2006 Report Share Posted August 17, 2006 3C. Peter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenrexford Posted August 17, 2006 Report Share Posted August 17, 2006 I went for 3♣ for one basic reason. 3♣ is the only non-misleading call, and partner should expect a possible 3-card suit and should be prepared for this call. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flame Posted August 17, 2006 Report Share Posted August 17, 2006 I wish it was mp and i would pass it.At imps id try 3H, yes its high bid and therefore less flexiable, but atleast ithe suit is nice which might allow dummy reversal, and maybe he will make 4H. I dont think 3C willl get us to better spot, unlike the guy before me, i think 3C is misleading even more then 3H, because partner will expect atleast 4 diamonds, while 3H can be done with 3D4H so he will be more carfull maybe. 2NT is a problem because even if partner has KX in spades we are stil lrate to go down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pclayton Posted August 17, 2006 Report Share Posted August 17, 2006 2N. Its not scrambling either. By the way, i didn't think this was the toughest problem this month. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willow23 Posted August 17, 2006 Report Share Posted August 17, 2006 I would go with 3♥; We are NV my p's dbl should guarantee at least 4 in the suit.. Since I am holding 2/4 top honors..I suspect my p may have 5♥ but his suit quality is not good enough to overcall 3♥.. Looks like 4♥ contract is possible..but ultimately up to partner.. B) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdeegan Posted August 18, 2006 Report Share Posted August 18, 2006 :rolleyes: 3♦. The smallest lie. The suit is good enough to play opposite a doubleton - e.g. opposite 3-4-2-4 distribution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Codo Posted August 18, 2006 Report Share Posted August 18, 2006 These hands are a reason to play weak NT....I thought about 3 Spade and ask pd about a stopper. This will be a disaster if he has minimum or no stopper and no suit, but if it works, it rates better then a misleading 3 in a suit or 2 NT.But I am getting older, so 2 NT, whatever pd may understand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tlgoodwin Posted August 18, 2006 Report Share Posted August 18, 2006 Three clubs. Wasn't it said some time back (in MSC) that in these awkward negative-double situations, the cheapest available suit bid -- not a stopperless cheapest bid in notrump -- tends to be the best chance to avoid a disaster? With the same honors, but with 3-3-3-4 instead of 3-3-4-3, you would open one club and rebid three clubs over the negative double of two spades. Of course, you can avoid some of these problems by not opening a 3-3-4-3/3-3-3-4 mousetrap (fewer than 2 1/2 quick-tricks). TLGoodwin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keylime Posted August 19, 2006 Report Share Posted August 19, 2006 3♣, wholeheartedly. Never lie about major length, nor my opening length. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luke warm Posted August 21, 2006 Report Share Posted August 21, 2006 i'd have bid 3♥, unless 2nt is scrambling... for the 3♣ bidders, is that a pass/correct bid? if it isn't (ie, if partner doesn't bid 3♥ with 4 of them), i don't see the gain Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finch Posted August 21, 2006 Report Share Posted August 21, 2006 This is just a matter of partnership agreement. You have to agree what you do on the hand-type with no descriptive bid. My agreement is that 2NT shows a weak NT without necessarily a spade stopper, so that's what I bid. It's not a bidding problem, as such, becdause I have a systemic bid so I make it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walddk Posted August 21, 2006 Report Share Posted August 21, 2006 2NT, 12-14 balanced. If he passes, fine, if he bids 3NT I hope he has spades stopped. If he hasn't, he can bid 3♠. Roland Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted August 22, 2006 Author Report Share Posted August 22, 2006 ACTION......BBO POLL........BW POLLPASS...........1....................42NT..............8...................73C...............12.................93D...............2....................13H................8....................6OTHER..........2....................0 KLEINMAN: 3D. With 4 strong d and 3 weak clubs 3d is the smallest lie. WILLENKEN: 3C. Pass and 2nt risk a zero, 3c allows a preference to 3d and 3h does not. Lawerence, Becker: 3C. Leaves room for partner to do something useful. Zia: 3C. I would bid 3H with the same shape and a more bullish hand. Robson: 3H. Could backfire. Wolff: 3H. This and similar hands must be treated this way. Cohen, Berkowitz, Bramley, Colker, Silver: 2NT. Bid no trump confidently on a balanced stopperless minimimum and live with it. Woolsey: Pass. We will defeat 2 spades more often than not. 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.