jchiu Posted June 2, 2007 Report Share Posted June 2, 2007 Sounds like a hand that I heard about while waiting in the check-in line to go to Oklahoma City last month ... K10xxx Q8x Axxx x Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenrexford Posted June 2, 2007 Report Share Posted June 2, 2007 Funny, perhaps, but this looks to me like a good hand for 2♦ in fourth seat. Invitational values.Great suit.Invites bidding a 5-card major, but probably not a four-card major.Expresses doubt, albeit a subtle expression, about the club stopper. Looks just about right. I'd like a sixth diamond, but so what? BTW, if fourth seat features intermediate jump shifts as an option, then X...suit should logically be stronger. This does not seem strong enough, with that analysis, for X...2♦, IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted June 2, 2007 Report Share Posted June 2, 2007 Funny, perhaps, but this looks to me like a good hand for 2♦ in fourth seat. Invitational values.true (at least by what I think you mean by invitational here)Great suit.trueInvites bidding a 5-card major, but probably not a four-card major.what?? How does a bid that shows a great suit just invite partner to start bidding other suits?Expresses doubt, albeit a subtle expression, about the club stopper.Not really. Well I guess on some plane if by subtle you mean, really subtle. Looks just about right. I'd like a sixth diamond, but so what? BTW, if fourth seat features intermediate jump shifts as an option, then X...suit should logically be stronger.Well, if you are allowing this bid on 5 card suits when 6 is standard, and if you are pretending it invites partner to start bidding other suits when if anything it suggests just the opposite, and if you decided to ignore suit quality requirements (not talking about the hand in question, merely in general) then I guess that logic would follow. But for the rest of us who seem to have those requirements...This does not seem strong enough, with that analysis, for X...2♦, IMO.Standard bidding does not agree. Despite all that I don't even think 2♦ is such an awful bid. Just a bid that is clearly more wrong than the alternative. But I might place 2♦ ahead of 1♦, which I don't mean as a knock at the 1♦ bidders as much as I mean 2♦ will usually work out fine. Double still is clearly best in my mind. 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.