Fluffy Posted March 2, 2009 Report Share Posted March 2, 2009 MPs, nobody vul ♠A6532♥-♦A754♣QJ107 S - W - N - E1♠-X-XX-psps-2♣-ps-psX-ps-ps-2♥??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jillybean Posted March 2, 2009 Report Share Posted March 2, 2009 What does partners XX show ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orlam Posted March 2, 2009 Report Share Posted March 2, 2009 How about doubling so that declarer doesn't know the trump split right away? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted March 2, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 2, 2009 What does partners XX show ? actually it showed 10+, no support, and 4+ cards in 2 suits, (hearts and diamonds after the pass of 2♣). But interested on what would it mean on your standard context. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P_Marlowe Posted March 2, 2009 Report Share Posted March 2, 2009 3D. I am not going to play 2HX Since Pass is forcing, passing now and subseq. bidding 3Dshowes add. values, which I dont have. With kind regardsMarlowe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted March 2, 2009 Report Share Posted March 2, 2009 Pass and pass pard's dbl. Why can't he have 5 hearts or 4 good ones? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skjaeran Posted March 2, 2009 Report Share Posted March 2, 2009 Pass and pass partners double. If I wasn't passing 2♥x now I'd have bid 2♣ over the redouble. I guess I'd have bid 2♣ the previous round at the table. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted March 3, 2009 Report Share Posted March 3, 2009 I'd have bid 2♣ on the second round. It's hardly a surprise that passing led to a bidding problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flytoox Posted March 3, 2009 Report Share Posted March 3, 2009 Pass and pass pd's dbl. This procedure looks so much likely that pd have a stack of hearts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted March 4, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 Partner had 1552 with Q1097x in hearts, 2♥ was normally 500, wich is better than your game. 6♦ was making becuase ♦ split 2-2 but we didn't find it anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeh Posted March 5, 2009 Report Share Posted March 5, 2009 I'd have bid 2♣ on the second round. It's hardly a surprise that passing led to a bidding problem. agreed. We should be looking ahead when partner redoubles... passing was lazy, and suggested interest in defending. We are morally certain that we don't want to defend 2♥. So why create a problem... bid 2♣ to announce a minimum unbalanced hand. Then we could trust partner's decisions Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dicklont Posted March 5, 2009 Report Share Posted March 5, 2009 I am not interested in defending with this hand and that´s why I should have bid before. In fact I don't like low-level doubles, most of the time you're better of declaring. Now I won´t run when partner doubles 2♥.Although my hand is not strong, it has two aces.All is not lost, maybe defending gives an ok result. 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.