H_KARLUK Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 [hv=d=n&v=e&s=sa97h54dkq9654ck3]133|100|Scoring: MPs[/hv]1♦ 1♥ 2♣ 2♥3♦ P 3♠ P?Sound easy? ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OleBerg Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 Yeah, sounds easy to have passed 2♥. But with a slightly better hand with the same distribution, I would have bid 3♦, so the problem is relevant. I pass the buck with 4♥, choice of games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtvesuvius Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 4♣ for me, I think this should show 2 card support. 4♥ seems to show a 3=1=6=3 type hand imo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeh Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 My initial reaction was that this was posted in the wrong thread, but a little reflection made me see the problem was more interesting than I had thought. I don't like the 3♦ call. I assume that we don't have methods here to limit the strength (if we did, then the OP should spell it out.. H, do you know that there are expert treatments in these sequences that can allow opener to show good or weak rebids? Apart from pass, of course) If we'd make the same call on AQx x AKJxxx Qxx, then we have created a real problem. However, here we are and the question is whether to take the preference or to raise to 4♠. The raise cannot logically show 4 spades.. with the values to bid 3♦ and with four spades, we would have bid 2♠. This has all the hallmarks of a hand that may play extremely well in the moysian. Picture KQJx xxx x AQxxxx. So I raise... partner should NOT be introducing a weakish spade suit... he had 3♥ available as a notrump probe, and we have denied 4 spades... so he is inviting a moysian game and I am delighted to oblige. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skjaeran Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 4♠, suggestion to play in the Moysian. I'd prefer passing 2♥ though, I've overstated my values a bit.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 I like 4♠ best. And I feel probably even more strongly than the other posters so far that 3♦ was an overbid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Echognome Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 I think 3♦ is ok, ONLY IF you are playing Bad/Good 2NT (i.e. inverted G/;). Regardless, I like 4♠ now. I agree with Mike.I agree with Harald.I agree with Josh.I agree with... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_KARLUK Posted February 27, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 I don't like the 3♦ call. I assume that we don't have methods here to limit the strength (if we did, then the OP should spell it out.. H, do you know that there are expert treatments in these sequences that can allow opener to show good or weak rebids? Apart from pass, of course) ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 I think 3♦ is ok, ONLY IF you are playing Bad/Good 2NT. I also think 3♦ is ok if you have a nonstandard agreement by which it shows this exact hand! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 Gadget or no gadget available, I find a pass to 2♥ rather wimpish. These days you have to compete not only when you have extra strength, but also when you have extra shape. Anyway, sounds like pard has problems with hearts, so 3NT seems out (yeah, I know this is shocking coming from me.. lol). Now I prefer 4♣ to 4♠ because pard might still have a 6-4. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_KARLUK Posted February 27, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 Gadget or no gadget available, I find a pass to 2♥ rather wimpish. These days you have to compete not only when you have extra strength, but also when you have extra shape. Anyway, sounds like pard has problems with hearts, so 3NT seems out (yeah, I know this is shocking coming from me.. lol). Now I prefer 4♣ to 4♠ because pard might still have a 6-4.He had 6/4 as you said. And 4♣ appeared. 1♦ 1♥ 2♣ 2♥3♦ PASS 3♠ PASS4♣ PASS 4♥ PASS4♠ PASS 4NT PASS6♣ AP[hv=d=n&v=e&n=sa97h54dkq9654ck3&w=st32hq97daj872ct9&e=sqj5hkjt82dt3cqj7&s=sk864ha63dca86542]399|300|Scoring: MP[/hv] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Echognome Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 I think 3♦ is ok, ONLY IF you are playing Bad/Good 2NT. I also think 3♦ is ok if you have a nonstandard agreement by which it shows this exact hand! Touche. Fair point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted February 28, 2009 Report Share Posted February 28, 2009 I Agree with adam: 4♣. ♣Kx is a nice support and I wanna show it. 3♠ might be last train to 3NT, I don't wanna raise it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted February 28, 2009 Report Share Posted February 28, 2009 I Agree with adam: 4♣. ♣Kx is a nice support and I wanna show it. 3♠ might be last train to 3NT, I don't wanna raise it. Partner lost his 3♥ card? :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OleBerg Posted February 28, 2009 Report Share Posted February 28, 2009 I think 3♦ is ok, ONLY IF you are playing Bad/Good 2NT. I also think 3♦ is ok if you have a nonstandard agreement by which it shows this exact hand! Touche. Fair point.Not really. The diamond suit is a tad to weak, to take away partners option of competing in 3♣. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peachy Posted February 28, 2009 Report Share Posted February 28, 2009 I have only seen pleasant and polite disagreements about the 3D bid. Good restraint by all. 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.