kgr Posted September 7, 2008 Report Share Posted September 7, 2008 [hv=d=n&v=b&n=sjt87hk75dkj86c75&s=saq63hda9543ckj98]133|200|Scoring: IMP[/hv]P-(p)-1D-(1H)2D-(2H)-3D-(3H)p-(p)-4D-All pass...one of both players was removed after this hand. Who do you remove for his bad bidding? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Echognome Posted September 7, 2008 Report Share Posted September 7, 2008 On an ATB, I would blame North mainly for not making a negative double over 1♥. I don't understand why someone would be removed from the table. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtfanclub Posted September 8, 2008 Report Share Posted September 8, 2008 On an ATB, I would blame North mainly for not making a negative double over 1♥. Not that I disagree that North should make a negative X, but surely South can make a 3♠ call over 2♥ or 3♥, unless you play that a failure to X absolutely denies 4 spades. Not like it costs anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kgr Posted September 8, 2008 Author Report Share Posted September 8, 2008 On an ATB, I would blame North mainly for not making a negative double over 1♥. Not that I disagree that North should make a negative X, but surely South can make a 3♠ call over 2♥ or 3♥, unless you play that a failure to X absolutely denies 4 spades. Not like it costs anything. I was South and was removed after the hand.I didn't bid 2♠ because I thought it would be a search for 3NT or 5D and didn't feel strong enough for it.... Apparantly the hand is strong enough anyway to go to 5D with a good 2D-partner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted September 8, 2008 Report Share Posted September 8, 2008 Think both bid horribly but north's mistake is most basic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtfanclub Posted September 8, 2008 Report Share Posted September 8, 2008 I didn't bid 2♠ because I thought it would be a search for 3NT or 5D and didn't feel strong enough for it.... Apparantly the hand is strong enough anyway to go to 5D with a good 2D-partner. You don't agree? Why can't partner have (Oh God, here comes another sample hand)... KxxxxxKxxxxxx which isn't even a good 2D? But first mistake has to go to the failure to X. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lobowolf Posted September 8, 2008 Report Share Posted September 8, 2008 It's more basic from the standpoint that it's fairly generally accepted that you show your majors (though see other thread for a hand where people were fine with supporting diamonds in lieu of showing a FIVE-card major). However, from a valuation ("Why'd we miss game?!") standpoint, the 3♦ call really undersells the value of a 5-loser hand that has a void in the opponents' suit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flameous Posted September 8, 2008 Report Share Posted September 8, 2008 The problem in the bidding wasn't finding the right level but the right suit to play in. Of course the first problem was the absence of negative double, but south also had rather obvious 2♠ after 2♥. Thus it's not just one person to blame. 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.