Difficult Choices

[Winstonm]

[hv=d=w&v=n&n=s65h6542dkq74ck83&s=sa32hkj9da86ca1062]133|200|Scoring: IMP

1S-P-P-?[/hv]

 

Playing with a fine player whom I have not played with in over 20 years, I found myself with the balancing hand in a team match. Although I didn't care for the hand's shape, I did like the controls and the 3 aces and was not fond of the weakish spade holding for NT.

 

I would think normal action would be to raise the 1N balance from the usual 11-14 to more like 13-15 over 1S, but this hand seemed a bit much for 1N and not enough for double followed by NT. I finally settled on double.

 

After LHO's pass, partner bid the expected 2H. I didn't see any future in bidding more so I passed and LHO chimed back in with 2S. Partner bid 3D, now.

 

Now I liked my hand more and chose a 3S call to attempt to steer partner into rebidding a 5-card suit (this may have been expecting miracles though). I would have passed 4D. LHO doubled and partner passed. I guess I could have redoubled now, but instead chose to try for game at least and bid 4H - luckily, this went unpunished.

 

Partner played well and we escaped for down 2.

 

Where did we fall apart here? Obviously, looking back I wish I had reopened with 1N - but I didn't.

[pclayton]

Many play a balancing 1N over a major as 11-16 for this reason.

[Winstonm]

Many play a balancing 1N over a major as 11-16 for this reason.

That seems like too wide of spread to me - what do you do as responder with 8-10 and a decent 5-card minor, knowing where the HCP are located? I understand that balancing is imperfect, but that seems a little too imperfect. :P

[pclayton]

Many play a balancing 1N over a major as 11-16 for this reason.

That seems like too wide of spread to me - what do you do as responder with 8-10 and a decent 5-card minor, knowing where the HCP are located? I understand that balancing is imperfect, but that seems a little too imperfect. :P

Range Stayman helps a lot:

 

2♣ starts as usual.

---> 2♦ = 11-13 with no 4cM

---> 2♥ / 2♠ = 11-13 with

---> 2N = ANY 15-16 hand; then 3♣ starts the ask over.

 

There may be better methods too. But 11-16 is fairly standard.

[Winstonm]

Many play a balancing 1N over a major as 11-16 for this reason.

That seems like too wide of spread to me - what do you do as responder with 8-10 and a decent 5-card minor, knowing where the HCP are located? I understand that balancing is imperfect, but that seems a little too imperfect. :P

Range Stayman helps a lot:

 

2♣ starts as usual.

---> 2♦ = 11-13 with no 4cM

---> 2♥ / 2♠ = 11-13 with

---> 2N = ANY 15-16 hand; then 3♣ starts the ask over.

 

There may be better methods too. But 11-16 is fairly standard.

Hadn't thought of this - but I think this is actually part of Roman, Little Roman, or Blue Team but I can't recall which. The Italians in one of those systems used a wide-latitude opening 1N with a size-ask response. If memory serves, I think it was 13-16 range 1N with 17+ opened 1C.

 

Still with 11-16, I see that 2D and 2H/2S show 11-13.

What do you do with 14? :D

 

Just kidding - add or subtract accordingly, I know.

[han]

What Phil says is fairly standard and has been recommended by many mainstream experts.

[Halo]

What Phil says is fairly standard and has been recommended by many mainstream experts.

I like this and I'm going to agree it with all my partners. Advantages look to outweigh the disadvantages by a long way.

[mikeh]

I play this range-ask, and we call in Rigal.. I don't know if Rigal was the original inventor.

 

This is a tough, tough hand, and I think I'd reach 3N:

 

While Axx in ♠ argues for downgrading, the controls and that ♣10 in a long suit would get me to double and bid 2N: which shows, for me, about 16-18... with 19-20, reopen 2N and with 10-15, reopen 1N. Partner has just enough to raise me to the losing spot.

 

So we overbid to another hopeless game: it wil often be a push and when it isn't... well... next board, please.

[Guest Jlall]

yeah over 1M 11-17- balancing NT is pretty sweet but it's not as great as everyone seems to say. Range stayman is great but you still get to 2N with 11 opp 10 and stuff.

[mike777]

[hv=d=w&v=n&n=s65h6542dkq74ck83&s=sa32hkj9da86ca1062]133|200|Scoring: IMP

1S-P-P-?[/hv]

 

Playing with a fine player whom I have not played with in over 20 years, I found myself with the balancing hand in a team match. Although I didn't care for the hand's shape, I did like the controls and the 3 aces and was not fond of the weakish spade holding for NT.

 

I would think normal action would be to raise the 1N balance from the usual 11-14 to more like 13-15 over 1S, but this hand seemed a bit much for 1N and not enough for double followed by NT. I finally settled on double.

 

After LHO's pass, partner bid the expected 2H. I didn't see any future in bidding more so I passed and LHO chimed back in with 2S. Partner bid 3D, now.

 

Now I liked my hand more and chose a 3S call to attempt to steer partner into rebidding a 5-card suit (this may have been expecting miracles though). I would have passed 4D. LHO doubled and partner passed. I guess I could have redoubled now, but instead chose to try for game at least and bid 4H - luckily, this went unpunished.

 

Partner played well and we escaped for down 2.

 

Where did we fall apart here? Obviously, looking back I wish I had reopened with 1N - but I didn't.

I think this is a very very tough hand.

Imps at NV so I doubt I am going to lose the match on this one.

 

I understand x or 1nt on this one.

 

What happened at the other table?

[Winstonm]

What happened at the other table?

 

I don't know but for sure it wasn't 4H? :)

 

We lost a bit on this board, I think, but won the match by 1 imp. Perhaps that last board that made the difference is worth a post as well.

[whereagles]

Range stayman is good, but I think pard got a bit too enthousiastic here :) (though I see his point)

[Fluffy]

You were unlucky not to have a fit mainly, also it can be argued that passing first and then bidding 3♠ is inconsistent, maybe a pass is more correct.