H_KARLUK Posted January 3, 2009 Report Share Posted January 3, 2009 [hv=d=n&v=b&s=skth9873dak2cj965]133|100|[/hv] P 1♣ 2♥* ? * WJO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerben42 Posted January 3, 2009 Report Share Posted January 3, 2009 I guess I would bid 3♣, but although it probably should be unanimous, it won't be :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted January 3, 2009 Report Share Posted January 3, 2009 Actually, you can afford to pass. If there's a game for our side, pard probably will bid again over 2♥. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cascade Posted January 3, 2009 Report Share Posted January 3, 2009 We have a gadget for this situation. When the opponent's overcall a higher rankiing suit at the two-level we play: 1x (2y) ? 3x is exactly invitational 9-11(12) 2NT is either 6-8(9) or GF with a fit If GF then 2NT would have a stopper as we can also bid 3y with a GF hand and without a stopper (frequently with shortage in the opponent's suit). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted January 3, 2009 Report Share Posted January 3, 2009 We have a gadget for this situation. When the opponent's overcall a higher rankiing suit at the two-level we play: 1x (2y) ? 3x is exactly invitational 9-11(12) 2NT is either 6-8(9) or GF with a fit If GF then 2NT would have a stopper as we can also bid 3y with a GF hand and without a stopper (frequently with shortage in the opponent's suit). That might be ok, but I think you need to define what invitational in a minor suit means. In other words can it be only 4 card support or should pard expect 5 card support? In a major suit does it show 3 card or 4 card support? How much length does 2nt promise? Do any of the bids infer shortness or can it be 4333 shape? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1eyedjack Posted January 3, 2009 Report Share Posted January 3, 2009 Actually, you can afford to pass. If there's a game for our side, pard probably will bid again over 2♥. I am uncomfortable with this. Not that I am particularly comfortable with alternatives, but I think that "can afford to pass" on the grounds that your problems are over when partner protects oversimplifies the case. Anyway, I voted for 3C. Even though 1C can be as few as 2 the way I play it, and that argues perhaps more in favour of pass, but it is less likely that he has 2 (or even 3) clubs the way the auction has developed to date. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted January 3, 2009 Report Share Posted January 3, 2009 I play rubensohl here, 2NT showing clubs with no definite strenght, I will have a tough decision next round. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dake50 Posted January 4, 2009 Report Share Posted January 4, 2009 Partner 1C on 2xC only if 44M 32. Unlikely here. 4333 possible. Some show of 10 needed, but not suggesting spades, not suggesting H-stop/wrong-siding NT. 3C for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdano Posted January 4, 2009 Report Share Posted January 4, 2009 I play rubensohl here, 2NT showing clubs with no definite strenght, I will have a tough decision next round. Give you are playing something artificial, I find it odd that you don't have two ways to raise clubs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted January 4, 2009 Report Share Posted January 4, 2009 of course, I can show GF in clubs with 3♦, but not invitational and weak raise Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nige1 Posted January 4, 2009 Report Share Posted January 4, 2009 Dealer: North Vul: Both Scoring: Unknown ♠ KT ♥ 9873 ♦ AK2 ♣ J965 P 1♣ 2♥* ?* WJOIMO 3♣ = 10, _P = 9, 3♥ = 4, 2N = 3, 3N = 2, _X = 1, 4♣ = 1 5♣ = 1, 3♦ = 1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shevek Posted January 4, 2009 Report Share Posted January 4, 2009 3♣. One of the pleasures of playing a weak notrump is realising that (minor) suit openings show "either a good suit or a good hand", making this straightforward. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rogerclee Posted January 4, 2009 Report Share Posted January 4, 2009 3♣. One of the pleasures of playing a weak notrump is realising that (minor) suit openings show "either a good suit or a good hand", making this straightforward. LOL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted January 4, 2009 Report Share Posted January 4, 2009 yeah.. where does it say we're playing weak NT? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rogerclee Posted January 4, 2009 Report Share Posted January 4, 2009 yeah.. where does it say we're playing weak NT? That is way less funny than only bidding 3♣ if you are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_KARLUK Posted January 4, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 4, 2009 [hv=d=n&v=b&n=sa98754hjdq754c32&w=skth9873dak2cj965&e=sq63ht4dj9cakq874&s=sj2hakq652dt863ct]399|300|[/hv] P 1♣ 2♥* ? * WJO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackshoe Posted January 4, 2009 Report Share Posted January 4, 2009 Given that hand, either South has misbid, or the partnership agreement has been misexplained. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted January 4, 2009 Report Share Posted January 4, 2009 Given that hand, either South has misbid, or the partnership agreement has been misexplained. That's a perfectly valid style of weak jump overcall. It's just on the sound end. I strongly disagree that the bid has been misexplained. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shevek Posted January 5, 2009 Report Share Posted January 5, 2009 yeah.. where does it say we're playing weak NT? That is way less funny than only bidding 3♣ if you are.Yes, I see your point. Opposite long clubs or 15+ balanced you probably want to be in 3NT or at least 4♣. I was just having a gentle bleat about systemic assumptions in the post. Playing Acol, I guess it's 3♥ then, though the underbid of 3♣ isn't bad.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwnn Posted February 6, 2010 Report Share Posted February 6, 2010 I miss these thread titles :blink: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rogerclee Posted February 6, 2010 Report Share Posted February 6, 2010 Old rogerclee was so mean :blink:. Sry! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhantomSac Posted February 7, 2010 Report Share Posted February 7, 2010 Given that hand, either South has misbid, or the partnership agreement has been misexplained. What? 10 Points including a Jx and a 6 card suit is a misexplanation for weak jump overcall? AFAIK the most common "point count" definition for a weak opening or jump overcall is 5 to 11 and a 6 card suit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackshoe Posted February 7, 2010 Report Share Posted February 7, 2010 Hm. I don't even remember making that post. :huh: "WJO" is inadequate as an explanation of the partnership agreement. Before I ruled MI, though, I should investigate further. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hanp Posted February 7, 2010 Report Share Posted February 7, 2010 Old rogerclee was so mean :(. Sry! But the old rogerclee was right 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.