Apollo81 Posted February 8, 2008 Report Share Posted February 8, 2008 All red, IMPs AJxxQxAxxxxxx You're playing 14-16 NTs and partner opens a minor and rebids 1NT over our spade response, so he has less than a 14 count if balanced. Partner could have 14-15 if unbalanced with a singleton spade. Assume 1453 or 1444 is more likely than 1354 or 1345 if partner is unbalanced. Is this worth an invite if:1. Partner opened 1♣2. Partner opened 1♦3. Partner opened a Precision 1♦ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hrothgar Posted February 8, 2008 Report Share Posted February 8, 2008 I would probably invite in all cases 11 opposite 11 gives us very good play for 2NT and this is a damn good 11. I feel slightly more worried about inviting over a natural 1♦ opening. We have an 8+ card fit, which means that they rate to have one as well. I can easily see us with enough strength for 3N, but the opponents having 5 cashing tricks in Hearts or Clubs off the top. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwnn Posted February 8, 2008 Report Share Posted February 8, 2008 I'd invite over 1♦ and precision 1♦, but the last one is close I think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy_h Posted February 8, 2008 Report Share Posted February 8, 2008 I'd invite in all 3 cases too. Nothing is stopping partner from having some intermediates. If partner opened 1D, I would invite and show diamonds whatever my method is (rather than bal invite) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ulven Posted February 8, 2008 Report Share Posted February 8, 2008 Pass. Heart queen and spade jack too soft. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finch Posted February 8, 2008 Report Share Posted February 8, 2008 this type of hand shows the problem with both not being able to raise diamonds on the first round and rebidding 1NT on unbalanced hands. If partner can have xKxxxKxxxxAKx then we're playing our diamond slam in 1NT. OK, that's possibly slightly carefully constructed, but many 1453s will make a large number of tricks in diamonds; you have to move with something to look for a diamond fit if that's a possible shape. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted February 8, 2008 Report Share Posted February 8, 2008 Over a 1D opener I would invite in diamonds. Over a 1C opener it is close.. I might pass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtfanclub Posted February 8, 2008 Report Share Posted February 8, 2008 Is this worth an invite if:1. Partner opened 1♣2. Partner opened 1♦3. Partner opened a Precision 1♦ For #1, I committed myself when I bid 1♠. If I didn't think I had enough to invite over 1NT, I shoulda bid 1♦. For #2, heck ya. 3♦ should be safe, so I can invite with impunity. For #3, I'd probably let it die. I don't have enough information. The good news is, since the opponents don't have enough information either, we may get a bonus trick or two from the defense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jlall Posted February 8, 2008 Report Share Posted February 8, 2008 I would invite opp all, inv in diamonds opp a 1D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skjaeran Posted February 9, 2008 Report Share Posted February 9, 2008 I would invite opp all, inv in diamonds opp a 1D Ditto. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdano Posted February 9, 2008 Report Share Posted February 9, 2008 this type of hand shows the problem with both not being able to raise diamonds on the first round and rebidding 1NT on unbalanced hands. If partner can have xKxxxKxxxxAKx then we're playing our diamond slam in 1NT. OK, that's possibly slightly carefully constructed, but many 1453s will make a large number of tricks in diamonds; you have to move with something to look for a diamond fit if that's a possible shape. Well, if partner opened 1D, I would just always invite in diamonds. It won't be the end of the world to play in 3D rather than 1N opposite a balanced min with four diamonds. So while I agree there can be a problem, I don't think the actual hand is a good example for that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apollo81 Posted February 10, 2008 Author Report Share Posted February 10, 2008 Was from bidding practice. I don't remember partner's hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finch Posted February 10, 2008 Report Share Posted February 10, 2008 this type of hand shows the problem with both not being able to raise diamonds on the first round and rebidding 1NT on unbalanced hands. If partner can have xKxxxKxxxxAKx then we're playing our diamond slam in 1NT. OK, that's possibly slightly carefully constructed, but many 1453s will make a large number of tricks in diamonds; you have to move with something to look for a diamond fit if that's a possible shape. Well, if partner opened 1D, I would just always invite in diamonds. It won't be the end of the world to play in 3D rather than 1N opposite a balanced min with four diamonds. So while I agree there can be a problem, I don't think the actual hand is a good example for that. Maybe I phrased myself badly. I concocted this hand to show that is really cannot possibly be right to pass 1NT if partner can have a hand looking like this. 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.