cnszsun Posted July 8, 2007 Report Share Posted July 8, 2007 [hv=d=n&v=n&n=sakj10xxxhxxdxca10x&s=shakxxdajxckqjxxx]133|200|Scoring: IMP1♠-2♣-(2♦)3♠-4♣4♦-4♥4♠-6NT[/hv] Opponents bid only once, 2♦.6♠ or 7♣ make, but 6NT have no chance after ♦ lead.After 4♠, south was thinking of bidding 5NT (pick a slam), but they have never discussed this, so he gived it up. Supposing you don't have this tool, pls make your comments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jillybean Posted July 8, 2007 Report Share Posted July 8, 2007 I don't like 3♠ but can understand the bid.What is 4♦? 1♠:2♣ (2♦)2♠:3♥3♠:4♣5♣:6♣ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hrothgar Posted July 8, 2007 Report Share Posted July 8, 2007 6NT seems premature... I like the rest of the auction Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Posted July 8, 2007 Report Share Posted July 8, 2007 Hi jillybeans2 I assume that the 4D bid is a cuebid 'in support' of clubs. If you agree to play COG(choice of game) cuebids, the 4D bid asks partner to 'pick a suit. If the COG bidder continues with a later 5C bid, the 4D bid would now show a mild slam try in clubs showing 'a diamond' cuebid(also known as an advance cuebid) Regards, Robert Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foo Posted July 8, 2007 Report Share Posted July 8, 2007 I agree with hrothgar that 6N is "blasting" more than necessary or necessarily smart. I'm not sure how much I like the previous auction, but ATM I'm equally not sure what I like better either. But leaping to 6N with two levels of bidding room left and a void in the only suit Opener has bid naturally doesn't seem right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nige1 Posted July 8, 2007 Report Share Posted July 8, 2007 (duplicate post deleted) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nige1 Posted July 8, 2007 Report Share Posted July 8, 2007 Dealer: North Vul: None Scoring: IMP ♠ AKJ10xxx ♥ xx ♦ x ♣ A10x ♠ [space] ♥ AKxx ♦ AJx ♣ KQJxxx 1♠-2♣-(2♦)3♠-4♣4♦-4♥4♠-6NT Opponents bid only once, 2♦.6♠ or 7♣ make, but 6NT have no chance after ♦ lead.After 4♠, south was thinking of bidding 5NT (pick a slam), but they have never discussed this, so he gived it up. Supposing you don't have this tool, pls make your comments.IMO North's bidding is OK except that he might have bid 5♣ rather than 4♠, even although it is an overbid IMO. South deserves more of the blame although he had a difficult bid over 4♠ because 4N might well be natural. IMO he could try 5♦, 5♥, 5N (pick a slam) or 6♠ rather then 6N. Even the hoggish 6♣ would have been be more successful. IMO 5♦ stands out if the earlier 4♦ could agree ♣ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted July 8, 2007 Report Share Posted July 8, 2007 <!-- NORTHSOUTH begin --><table border=1> <tr> <td> <table> <tr> <td>Dealer:</td> <td> North </td> </tr> <tr> <td>Vul:</td> <td> None </td> </tr> <tr> <td>Scoring:</td> <td> IMP </td> </tr> </table> </td> <td> <table border='1'> <tr> <th> <table> <tr> <th class='spades'>♠</th> <td> AKJ10xxx </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='hearts'>♥</th> <td> xx </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='diamonds'>♦</th> <td> x </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='clubs'>♣</th> <td> A10x </td> </tr> </table> </th> </tr> <tr> <th> <table> <tr> <th class='spades'>♠</th> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='hearts'>♥</th> <td> AKxx </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='diamonds'>♦</th> <td> AJx </td> </tr> <tr> <th class='clubs'>♣</th> <td> KQJxxx </td> </tr> </table> </th> </tr> </table> </td> <td> 1♠-2♣-(2♦)3♠-4♣4♦-4♥4♠-6NT </td> </tr> </table><!-- NORTHSOUTH end --> Opponents bid only once, 2♦.6♠ or 7♣ make, but 6NT have no chance after ♦ lead.After 4♠, south was thinking of bidding 5NT (pick a slam), but they have never discussed this, so he gived it up. Supposing you don't have this tool, pls make your comments. Excellent example hand of a very long, decades old, running debate.Should North jump to 3s showing a great playing dist. hand despite a lack of Hcp and no known fit. I assume 2c was 100% game force. Regardless of which side of that debate you prefer, with my stiff D and and 3 excellent clubs perhaps I can start this hand with 2 spades and try and keep the bidding low? I will mark it 66% to north for 3s and 33% to south for 6nt, 1% rub of the green. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cnszsun Posted July 9, 2007 Author Report Share Posted July 9, 2007 IMO North's bidding is OK except that he might have bid 4♣ because it is clearer then 4♦ 5♣ rather than 4♠, even although it is an overbid IMO. South deserves more of the blame although he had a difficult bid over 4♠ because 4N might well be natural. IMO he could try 5♦, 5♥, 5N (pick a slam) or 6♠ rather then 6N. Even the hoggish 6♣ would have been be more successful. IMO 5♦ stands out if the earlier 4♦ could agree ♣In my mind, 6NT is clear not a good bid, But the question is how to understand the calls made perviously. Even if south can bid 5♦ or 5♥ now to delay the decision, he will need to know what's going on finally. That's why i prefer 5NT if it's pick a slam.Some quesitons i want to know are:1. Is 4♣ natural or cuebid in support of ♥?2. What's 4♦?3. At any time, north showed his ♣ fit or did he get that chance? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P_Marlowe Posted July 9, 2007 Report Share Posted July 9, 2007 Hi, seeing both hands, I dont like 3S, but there are certainly hands outthere for which 3S will work, so...And I have to see both hands to seeif i like the bid or not. The main problem is, that 4D wasmeant by North as a cue agreeing clubs, which it is.But South did not take it as cue (else 6NT makes no sense at all). Over 3S, South could have set spadesas trumps, only if he bids 3NT or 4Cspades are not set, but he did not.If North wants to insist on spades, hehas to bid 4S. With kind regardsMarlowe PS: In another thread I wrote, that the meaningof 4C depends on (not) playing strong jump shifts,the given hands is a good example why it probablyshould not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jlall Posted July 9, 2007 Report Share Posted July 9, 2007 Seems like north has the easiest 4N bid in the history of bridge over 4H. Oh 3 keycards vry nice p, how about the Q? Oh the queen too, very nice lets bid 7. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nige1 Posted July 9, 2007 Report Share Posted July 9, 2007 seeing both hands, I dont like 3S, but there are certainly hands outthere for which 3S will work, so...And I have to see both hands to seeif i like the bid or not. IMO, in a game-forcing auction, a non game jump rebid like 3♠ should have one of 2 purposes... 1. To paint a specific picture, for example a solid suit or2. To show that partner's last bid improved your hand (here, because of the ♣ fit).I prefer the 2nd interpretation, so I like the 3♠ bid in the given auction :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pclayton Posted July 9, 2007 Report Share Posted July 9, 2007 As usual, Justin focuses on the main problem - 4S. 4N is so painfully obvious. 4S boxed South who bid what he thought he could make. Sure, south can go slower but the auction now becomes awkward. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted July 9, 2007 Report Share Posted July 9, 2007 3♠ means we play in spades even if you have a void. It is not best on tis auction. 4♣ is awful bid, you cannot cue kings opposite a (7)8+ card suit. 6NT was ugh.... 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.