Apollo81 Posted June 29, 2008 Report Share Posted June 29, 2008 xxxxx x xx xxxxx all red imps (1♣)-1♥-(1♠)-p(2♣)-4♦-(p)-? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matmat Posted June 29, 2008 Report Share Posted June 29, 2008 4H. it's game and p is likely to be longer in the suit anyway... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rogerclee Posted June 29, 2008 Report Share Posted June 29, 2008 I'd bid 4♥. Partner could've bid 2NT if he were more serious about diamonds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenrexford Posted June 29, 2008 Report Share Posted June 29, 2008 Weird thoughts here... Sure looks like a 4♥ call, but what the heck is the difference, in this sequence, between... 1♥...4♥ and1♥...3NT? Or, for that matter, what about 3♣ or 3♠? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy_h Posted June 29, 2008 Report Share Posted June 29, 2008 4H I guess Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neilkaz Posted June 29, 2008 Report Share Posted June 29, 2008 Partner has announced that he has a really good hand..so I bid 4♥ and ask WTP ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vilgan Posted June 29, 2008 Report Share Posted June 29, 2008 I guess I am a bit confused as to why this isn't a WTP? There are some inferences that can be made from partner bidding 1♥ instead of 2NT, but they don't matter as the bid is 4♥ regardless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted June 29, 2008 Report Share Posted June 29, 2008 Wow I disagree, I would pass and pray to go plus. Sorry for asking a silly question, but if partner wanted us to choose hearts when they are shorter than our diamonds, then why did he bid diamonds like that? He also knew he was offering us a choice on the same level. It seems illogical to me to say "I can bid game on the same level anyway, so why not even though I have a singleton" since it was partner's logic to make if he wanted to say "Since I am forcing to the same level as game in another suit, I will insist on that suit if all I need is a singleton." He is certain to have a heart loser so on the black suit lead and later continuation he will have no trumps left after drawing trumps unless hearts are 3-3. The extra trump here is HUUUGE. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtK78 Posted June 29, 2008 Report Share Posted June 29, 2008 Wow I disagree, I would pass and pray to go plus. Sorry for asking a silly question, but if partner wanted us to choose hearts when they are shorter than our diamonds, then why did he bid diamonds like that? He also knew he was offering us a choice on the same level. It seems illogical to me to say "I can bid game on the same level anyway, so why not even though I have a singleton" since it was partner's logic to make if he wanted to say "Since I am forcing to the same level as game in another suit, I will insist on that suit if all I need is a singleton." He is certain to have a heart loser so on the black suit lead and later continuation he will have no trumps left after drawing trumps unless hearts are 3-3. The extra trump here is HUUUGE. Can't disagree with anything said by jdonn. Game is not an issue. Partner overcalled 1♥ and, last I checked, a 1♥ overcall is not game forcing. So partner should not have a game forcing hand. Now, he does have a lot of red cards (certainly at least 11). But he is not expecting to make game without help. And the only help I have for him (as little as it is) is 2 diamonds and a heart singleton so he can ruff a heart. In addition, if you do bid 4♥ partner might actually believe that you prefer hearts to diamonds (where would he get that idea?). And the auction may not be over. The last thing that you want to hear is 5♥ over 4♠ or 5♣. If you pass 4♦, the opponents bid again, and partner bids 5♦, at least you didn't do anything to encourage him to do so. Pass and pray. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenrexford Posted June 29, 2008 Report Share Posted June 29, 2008 The more I think about this, the more convinced I am that this should be a 6-5 bid. With 5-5 or 6-6, the right course usually will be 2NT if you are prepared to bid at the 4-level. With 6-4, I think you should be able to bid 2NT. Strangely, I think 3♣ and 2♠ are void calls. I'm still not sure, though. Voids and 6-4's. Technically, I think fragment calls indicating the voids are slightly better. Heck, why not live large. Maybe 3♠ and 4♣ should also be void calls in theory, but 6-5. 3NT for the 7-5's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winstonm Posted June 29, 2008 Report Share Posted June 29, 2008 Partner asked me to chose between hearts and diamonds at the 4-level. If partner is not 6-6 in the reds then he is nutsola. I like diamonds better and I have a piece of doo doo for a hand. Pass and WTF is the problem? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtfanclub Posted June 30, 2008 Report Share Posted June 30, 2008 Wow I disagree, I would pass and pray to go plus. Sorry for asking a silly question, but if partner wanted us to choose hearts when they are shorter than our diamonds, then why did he bid diamonds like that? Well, if he has 6 hearts and 4 diamonds, and I have 1 heart and 5 diamonds.... I think he's more distributional than 6-4. Maybe 7-5. I'd bid 2NT with 6-5 but not 7-5, unless I was incredibly strong. Just bad luck that the opps are bidding both black suits and yet I don't have a fit for him. Anyhow, if he's 7-5, I suppose one possibility is that I've got some sort of 5-1-4-3 with decent count that was trapping, so he's leaving open the option of 6♦. I'm one of those weird freaks who thinks that not only should I bid 4♥, but that 4♦ is forcing. Partner had the option to X 2♣ to show a good hand with the red suits, ♥>♦. If he's willing to force to the 4 level, it had better be for choice of games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwnn Posted June 30, 2008 Report Share Posted June 30, 2008 With 6-4, I think you should be able to bid 2NT.. wtf? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rogerclee Posted June 30, 2008 Report Share Posted June 30, 2008 With 6-4, I think you should be able to bid 2NT.. wtf? I think this idea has considerable merit (and think it has been discussed before). But obviously not without discussion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted June 30, 2008 Report Share Posted June 30, 2008 I had some discussions about this before, and the conclusions were that hearts were longer on this sequence, not a 7-4, but a 7-5 is possible, 6-5 when hearts are very good. I'd bid 4♥ not because I expect it to make, but because I expect it to make less undertricks than diamonds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenrexford Posted June 30, 2008 Report Share Posted June 30, 2008 With 6-4, I think you should be able to bid 2NT.. wtf? I think this idea has considerable merit (and think it has been discussed before). But obviously not without discussion. I mean 1♥ and then 2NT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwnn Posted June 30, 2008 Report Share Posted June 30, 2008 I mean 1♥ and then 2NT. ok sorry Ken, I obviously should have got it the first time. it shows that I have evil preconceptions about your conventions and that I am a mean sexist. I hope I didn't offend you! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenrexford Posted June 30, 2008 Report Share Posted June 30, 2008 I mean 1♥ and then 2NT. ok sorry Ken, I obviously should have got it the first time. it shows that I have evil preconceptions about your conventions and that I am a mean sexist. I hope I didn't offend you! What the Shucks? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pclayton Posted June 30, 2008 Report Share Posted June 30, 2008 With 6-4, I think you should be able to bid 2NT.. wtf? I think this idea has considerable merit (and think it has been discussed before). But obviously not without discussion. Merit? This is what 2N shows. I think pard has a really good 6-5, and the suits aren't that disparate. With a 5-5 or a 5-6. Please nobody bring up the whole one-bid, two-bid business here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenrexford Posted June 30, 2008 Report Share Posted June 30, 2008 With 6-4, I think you should be able to bid 2NT.. wtf? I think this idea has considerable merit (and think it has been discussed before). But obviously not without discussion. Merit? This is what 2N shows. I think pard has a really good 6-5, and the suits aren't that disparate. With a 5-5 or a 5-6. Please nobody bring up the whole one-bid, two-bid business here. I mean, that's playable, but that's not the classic definition of a delayed 2NT. The classic definition is clearly longer in the first suit, and 6-4 expected. At least, that's how I remember it is my 1960-something Encyclopedia of Bridge. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benlessard Posted July 3, 2008 Report Share Posted July 3, 2008 Partner has a 7-5 or maybe a 65 with lousy diamonds. 1- he got a hand with enough distribution to make a 4 level bid.2- He doesnt have the same lenght of H & D and if he is 6-5 than there is a discrepency between the quality of the suits. (the 5 card is weak & the 6 card is good) So he can be 75 or 57. With 57 i prefer to bid D followed by an artificial Nt bid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nige1 Posted July 4, 2008 Report Share Posted July 4, 2008 all red imps♠ xxxxx ♥ x ♦ xx ♣ xxxxx(1♣)-1♥-(1♠)-p(2♣)-4♦-(p)-?Like Ken, I wonder if expert partnerships agree meanings for calls after(1♣)-1♥-(1♠)-p(2♣)-?? Perhaps ..._X = 4531 3451 or more shapely2♠ = Stop for notrump2N = 6+ ♥ 4 ♦/♠3♣ = Stop for notrump3♦ = 6+ ♥ 5 ♦4♦ = 76 or 75 or strong 65Or is this all too precious? ;) Anyway lacking such agreements ...IMO 4 ♥ = 10, _P = 5.At pairs, you should give more thought to pass. 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.