awm Posted January 28, 2008 Report Share Posted January 28, 2008 Opponents silent: 1♦ - 1♥1♠ - 1NT3♠ Is this possible? If so, what kind of hand would you expect? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted January 28, 2008 Report Share Posted January 28, 2008 Yes, I would play it shows about 16-18 with the expected shape of 5-6. Same as if I rebid 3♦ now regarding strength. 2♠ would be a 5-6 minimum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CSGibson Posted January 28, 2008 Report Share Posted January 28, 2008 Yes, I would play it shows about 16-18 with the expected shape of 5-6. Same as if I rebid 3♦ now regarding strength. 2♠ would be a 5-6 minimum. strong 5-6. GF if you have any sort of fit with either suit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted January 28, 2008 Report Share Posted January 28, 2008 Opponents silent: 1♦ - 1♥1♠ - 1NT3♠ Is this possible? If so, what kind of hand would you expect? no too complicated.....unless 1nt can have 11 hcp often Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jlall Posted January 28, 2008 Report Share Posted January 28, 2008 Opponents silent: 1♦ - 1♥1♠ - 1NT3♠ Is this possible? If so, what kind of hand would you expect? ya for sure, it shows less than a jump shift but a strong hand. I don't know if jdonn was serious about 16-18 or if he meant with shape included or something, but that is obviously going to be a jumpshift most of the time with 5-6 shape. Heck AKxxx x x AKxxxx is a jump shift and thats "14 points." I would bid this way with KQTxx x x AKJxxx or similar. 1C 1H 1S 1N 2S could be a 10 count or something so you would have to jump with a hand that strong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted January 28, 2008 Report Share Posted January 28, 2008 not sure why I cannot just bid 2s with that hand but ok... I did open yes/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jlall Posted January 28, 2008 Report Share Posted January 28, 2008 not sure why I cannot just bid 2s with that hand but ok... Because that is how you would bid KTxxx x J AQxxxx? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted January 28, 2008 Report Share Posted January 28, 2008 not sure why I cannot just bid 2s with that hand but ok... Because that is how you would bid KTxxx x J AQxxxx? it is...ok....geez.... I guess partner expect us to open on dist not hcp. When I get to play pick up with jlall i pass this hand first or second seat. hope to win later in bidding or in the play or defense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted January 28, 2008 Report Share Posted January 28, 2008 Obv by "16-18" i mean "the range between minimum and jump shift" which yes for this shape is going to be something like about 14-15 in actual high cards depending on the hand. Lazy explaining :mellow: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted January 28, 2008 Report Share Posted January 28, 2008 since 1♦ denied 5 spades for me, this has to show a highly concentrated hand with 4 spades and 6 diamonds, something like AKJ10 x KQJ9xx xx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lexlogan Posted January 28, 2008 Report Share Posted January 28, 2008 1♦-1♥-1♠-1NT-3♠ ? A hand such as KJxxx x AKQxxx x . Opener quite properly preferred the long, strong diamonds to the weaker spades, and did not wish to force to game over 1♥ as partner might cover none of his losers whatsoever -- 7 tricks at a diamond contract would not be a shock. Responder's 1NT rebid was a bit more encouraging; his failure to rebid hearts increases the chance of 3 spades or 2+ diamonds. 3♠ is descriptive and highly encouraging if responder fits either suit. Note that in SAYC, at least, opening the longer suit with 5-6 would be normal; and there is no reason to assume 1♦ denies 5 spades if the extent of the agreement is "SAYC" or "2/1 GF" . Some experts might prefer to open 1♠ holding xxxxx x AKQxxx A, but that would not be an overwhelming choice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P_Marlowe Posted January 28, 2008 Report Share Posted January 28, 2008 Not really, but my first question counter questionwould be an inquiry about the forcing natureof 1S. If the 1S bid is forcing, ... than would say that3S just creates a game, contrary to a 2S bid,which would just show a 6-5 hand with at most15/16HCP. If the 1S bid is nonforcing, I would say, that ahand, which wants to bid 3S in the 3rd round tocreate a game forcing auction, could have bid 2Sthe round before. With kind regardsMarlowe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdano Posted January 28, 2008 Report Share Posted January 28, 2008 Of course this exists, and of course it shows an invitational 5-6. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bhall Posted January 28, 2008 Report Share Posted January 28, 2008 It's much simpler to come at this question from responder's perspective. It simply says: I expect us to make 10 tricks with ♦ as trump, or 9 tricks with ♠ as trump, even though you have shown no fit for either suit. If responder is xx QJxxx x KJxxx, he should probably pass. Holding xx in both suits, he should prefer 4♦. IMHO, most of the constructions people have offered would satisfy this criterion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awm Posted January 28, 2008 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2008 Here was the actual hand: ♠AJxxx♥x♦AKQxxxx♣- Responder held: ♠Tx♥K9xx♦T♣QTxxxx Responder passed 3♠, which failed by one trick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted January 28, 2008 Report Share Posted January 28, 2008 :rolleyes: I would have jump shifted with that hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jlall Posted January 28, 2008 Report Share Posted January 28, 2008 Here was the actual hand: ♠AJxxx♥x♦AKQxxxx♣- Responder held: ♠Tx♥K9xx♦T♣QTxxxx Responder passed 3♠, which failed by one trick. wow, 1S Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted January 29, 2008 Report Share Posted January 29, 2008 not sure why I cannot just bid 2s with that hand but ok... Because that is how you would bid KTxxx x J AQxxxx? So 2♠ is not constructive? Without game interest I think I might as well bid 2♦, at least at matchpoints. I would interpret 2♠ as invitational. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pclayton Posted January 29, 2008 Report Share Posted January 29, 2008 not sure why I cannot just bid 2s with that hand but ok... Because that is how you would bid KTxxx x J AQxxxx? So 2♠ is not constructive? Without game interest I think I might as well bid 2♦, at least at matchpoints. I would interpret 2♠ as invitational. I wouldn't think so. With a 5-6, game is still possible with a minimum opening, so the 5th spade needs to be shown. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apollo81 Posted January 29, 2008 Report Share Posted January 29, 2008 I bet a lot of people play 3N by South here 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.