untangle this mess

[jillybean]

[hv=d=w&v=a&n=saha82dq62cakq765&s=s87654hkqj6da853c]133|200|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

West North East South

 

 Pass  1♣    Pass  1♦

 1♠    2♠    Pass  3♦

 Pass  4NT   Pass  5♣

 Pass  6♦    Pass  Pass

 Pass  

[matmat]

I do not, for the life of me, understand the 1♦ call. If for some reason I am not bidding my 5 card spade suit, I am not going to mention those awful diamonds, but would rather bid the hearts.

[EricK]

At what stage did south realise that their '♦KQ' were actually ♥s? :rolleyes:

[hotShot]

I can see that the ♠ suit is weak, but it's 5 of them and 1♠ promises only 4. Additionally there is no rebid problem.

[Codo]

As all other said: 1 ♦ is never right and there is no way to recover from this major crime. Anythng but 1 ♠ is not bridge- besides some kind of transfers.

 

North was a little too enterprising, but I do understand his enthusiasm.

Give sout xxx,xxx,Akxxx,xx and the grand is rolling home, so given that he has no better methods avaiable, his slam try was fine.

[helene_t]

Maybe there was a misunderstanding about the meaning of the 2♠ bid: South though it showed diamond support (like responder's cuebid shows support for opener's suit) but North thought it just showed general strength and that 3♦ therefore shows extra length.

 

If I am guessing right, North is correct. 2♠ does not show diamonds. South needs to bid 3♥ instead of 3♦.

[the hog]

As all other said: 1 ♦ is never right and there is no way to recover from this major crime. Anythng but 1 ♠ is not bridge- besides some kind of transfers.

 

North was a little too enterprising, but I do understand his enthusiasm.

Give sout xxx,xxx,Akxxx,xx and the grand is rolling home, so given that he has no better methods avaiable, his slam try was fine.

I agree with Roland.

[vuroth]

Maybe there was a misunderstanding about the meaning of the 2♠ bid: South though it showed diamond support (like responder's cuebid shows support for opener's suit) but North thought it just showed general strength and that 3♦ therefore shows extra length.

That's my take, too.

[mikeh]

As others have observed, there are errors/misunderstandings at two points.

 

The 1♦ bid is incredibly poor. This is a clear 1♠ bid. S may have been thinking that he could find a major suit fit if opener had 4 cards in a major since most B/I players are taught to bid up the line as opener, and S may have thought that a 5-3 spade fit would not be a good idea because his spades were so weak.

 

These thoughts, if they were present, consititute master-minding. One should bid as normally as possible. The normal response with 5=4=4=0 is 1♠.

 

After that, I agree that it appears that S may have thought that 2♠ agreed diamonds, or it may be that S was now caught in the headlights and made the cheapest feasible rebid out of fear and confusion.

 

The auction was out of control already. I have sympathy for N at this juncture... keycard is a very crude weapon to use, but as little as KJxxx in diamonds, with no other hcp at all, might allow slam to make, especially if they don't lead hearts.

 

BTW, this is not going to be an easy hand to bid under any circumstances, and I would applaud anyone who got to 4♥ knowing what they were doing (altho if spades are 6-1, maybe even that game goes down)

[hanp]

3NT should have good play, 1C - 1S - 3NT is a straightforward auction.

[mikeh]

3NT should have good play, 1C - 1S - 3NT is a straightforward auction.

yes, for some reason (lack of caffeine, too much caffeine?) I only counted 8 tricks.... well, this is in the B/I forum :)

[jillybean]

Ouch,

I did think 1♦ was a smart way to get both majors into the auction since the ♠'s were so weak. And I did think 2♠ was a ♦ raise (or a general gf and partner would bid on without 4♦ support). Having gotten into the mess, I thought 3♦ was saying 'nothing more to tell you'.

[TimG]

The 1♦ bid is incredibly poor. This is a clear 1♠ bid. S may have been thinking that he could find a major suit fit if opener had 4 cards in a major since most B/I players are taught to bid up the line as opener, and S may have thought that a 5-3 spade fit would not be a good idea because his spades were so weak.

 

These thoughts, if they were present, constitute master-minding.

Perhaps I should not mention this here in the B/I forum. But, there was a Josephine Culbertson hand where she was 5503 and opened 1♣ in hopes that partner would bid a major and remove any guesswork. It worked for her!

[JohnnyHiLo]

Hi Kathryn,

 

I was rereading Mike Lawrence's 1982 book "The Complete Book on Overcalls in Contract Bridge" and he considers the 2s cue bid to be a "I have a good hand and I don't know what to do cue bid". The discussion begins on page 161 in chapter called "The Many Faces of the Cue Bid". The next chapter is a quiz on cue bids. In general Lawrence shows hands that have some tolerance for partner's suit but for the most part he is not looking at supporting the original bid suit unless he gives a direct raise. Often, when starting with a minor suit, he is cue bidding for a game in notrump or, as a last resort, landing in 4 of a minor. He rarely bids 5 in a minor. Incidentally, when the original bidder rebids their own suit freely at the 3 level he generally shows them having 6 cards in the suit. Reading those 2 chapters should provide some glimpse of what I was trying to do on that hand.

 

John

[jillybean]

Hi John,

 

I dont have that book, I might have to get it.

A direct raise here is obviously nf so a gf raise must go via the cue bid but then jump to 5m, 4m being a signoff?

 

Im going away skiing for 5 days so will check on this thread when I get back ;)

[jillybean]

Incidentally, when the original bidder rebids their own suit freely at the 3 level he generally shows them having 6 cards in the suit.

Is the 3♦ a free bid ? 2♠ is forcing.

[matmat]

Ouch,

I did think 1♦ was a smart way to get both majors into the auction since the ♠'s were so weak. And I did think 2♠ was a ♦ raise (or a general gf and partner would bid on without 4♦ support). Having gotten into the mess, I thought 3♦ was saying 'nothing more to tell you'.

do you and your p's bid up the line?

 

i.e. is p's rebid with 4=4=2=3 1♥ over 1♣-1♦ or is it 1N?

[helene_t]

Incidentally, when the original bidder rebids their own suit freely at the 3 level he generally shows them having 6 cards in the suit.

Is the 3♦ a free bid ? 2♠ is forcing.

No, this isn't a free bid.

 

I wouldn't know how to bid over this 2♠ bid, I suspect different partnerships have different agreements. If we haven't discussed this and we don't play anything like Ingberman or Lebensohl in general, I would make the most natural bid here rather than distinguishing between strong and weak hands - after all it is not clear which bids show extra strength in a GF situation anyway.

 

So 3♦ with six of them, 2NT with a spade guard, 3♣ with some support, say three or at least two clubs, 3♥ with four of them. With

xxxx

Hxx

Hxxxx

x

I would bid 3♦ so I don't think 3♦ shows six, but most often it will be based on six.

[jmcw]

Hi Kathryn,

 

I was rereading Mike Lawrence's 1982 book "The Complete Book on Overcalls in Contract Bridge" and he considers the 2s cue bid to be a "I have a good hand and I don't know what to do cue bid". The discussion begins on page 161 in chapter called "The Many Faces of the Cue Bid". The next chapter is a quiz on cue bids. In general Lawrence shows hands that have some tolerance for partner's suit but for the most part he is not looking at supporting the original bid suit unless he gives a direct raise. Often, when starting with a minor suit, he is cue bidding for a game in notrump or, as a last resort, landing in 4 of a minor. He rarely bids 5 in a minor. Incidentally, when the original bidder rebids their own suit freely at the 3 level he generally shows them having 6 cards in the suit. Reading those 2 chapters should provide some glimpse of what I was trying to do on that hand.

 

John

North has another option here. What about DBL/1♠?. Keeps the bidding lower, allowing partner more flexibility.

Following Souths rebid North will be better placed to determine a sensible continuation.

[jillybean]

The cold didn’t erase the memory of this hand but thinking about it made me see that 3♦ must be 6+ here, had the hand had been bid properly. Like my skiing, slow and sometimes painful progress in this game.

 

I take 100% responsibility for the mess on this hand but ignoring my biding, I would like to hear why you chose 2♠ or double on this hand.

 

Dealer: East Vul: All Scoring: IMP ♠ A ♥ A82 ♦ Q62 ♣ AKQ765

 

West North East South

 

- - Pass 1♣

Pass 1♦ 1♠ ?

[jdonn]

I choose double because it's very cheap and totally descriptive. Why cuebid now when I can show more of my shape, learn more of partner's shape and strength, and THEN cuebid to create the exact same force?

 

As for a fear of partner passing, he probably won't, and if he does I don't see why I wouldn't be thrilled anyway.