Phil Posted April 18, 2009 Report Share Posted April 18, 2009 xx x KQJTxxx Kxx vul/not ,mps 1♥ - 3♠ - ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karlson Posted April 18, 2009 Report Share Posted April 18, 2009 I suppose I should. 5♦ if that's not a fit jump. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Posted April 18, 2009 Report Share Posted April 18, 2009 I suppose I should. 5♦ if that's not a fit jump. Jumps to game are never fit jumps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
655321 Posted April 18, 2009 Report Share Posted April 18, 2009 5♦ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karlson Posted April 18, 2009 Report Share Posted April 18, 2009 I suppose I should. 5♦ if that's not a fit jump. Jumps to game are never fit jumps. I agree that that's pretty standard, but I've certainly had a partner for whom all jumps in competition were fit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rogerclee Posted April 18, 2009 Report Share Posted April 18, 2009 I would double and I don't really get why I might want to bid 5♦ when 1) I have no aces and two small spades.2) I am happy to pass 3NT if partner bids that over my double.2) I can always get to 5♦ later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finch Posted April 18, 2009 Report Share Posted April 18, 2009 1♥ - (3♠) - x - (P)4♥ - (P) - 5♦ shows this hand? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLOL Posted April 18, 2009 Report Share Posted April 18, 2009 1♥ - (3♠) - x - (P)4♥ - (P) - 5♦ shows this hand? umm...yes? How about xx x AKQJxxx xxx hoping to hear 3N. Anyways I would pass. Edit: my dad votes for double. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karlson Posted April 18, 2009 Report Share Posted April 18, 2009 I was thinking about this, it seems reasonable that 5♦ over 4♥ shows this hand, since it doesn't leave room for any other strains. But if the minors were reversed, would you still bid the same way and bid 5♣ over 4♥? That sure sounds like both minors. Anyway, the idea of making a negative double with only one suit that I actually want to ever play in makes me uneasy, but I guess it will work fine on this hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted April 18, 2009 Report Share Posted April 18, 2009 I think the double is clear and I can't believe there are 5♦ bids. Partner opened our singleton, they bid our small doubleton on our right, and now we are worth 5♦?? I would much sooner just pass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted April 18, 2009 Author Report Share Posted April 18, 2009 1♥ - (3♠) - x - (P)4♥ - (P) - 5♦ shows this hand? umm...yes? How about xx x AKQJxxx xxx hoping to hear 3N. Anyways I would pass. Edit: my dad votes for double. Jeez you're getting chicken in your old age :rolleyes: . I passed too. Pard also passed with Ax JTxxx Ax AQxx. I guess the doublers are +150 (or is this a 5♦ call after 4♦ ?!), but -140 was pretty lousy when I led my heart and pard ducked the spade off the board. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted April 18, 2009 Report Share Posted April 18, 2009 I guess the doublers are +150 (or is this a 5♦ call after 4♦ ?!) Uh, yes?!?! But why would partner not bid 3NT anyway? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLOL Posted April 18, 2009 Report Share Posted April 18, 2009 I was thinking about this, it seems reasonable that 5♦ over 4♥ shows this hand, since it doesn't leave room for any other strains. But if the minors were reversed, would you still bid the same way and bid 5♣ over 4♥? That sure sounds like both minors. Anyway, the idea of making a negative double with only one suit that I actually want to ever play in makes me uneasy, but I guess it will work fine on this hand. It is weird to me that making a negative double with a 1 suiter hoping to find 3N makes you more uneasy than with a hand that has 11 cards in 2 suits at least. I mean even with 1156 you would pass partners 4H if you somehow made a negative double. So we are talking about either 12 minor cards or 2056. 2056 is a problem, but it seems obvious to me that no other shapes would start with a negative double or pull 4H. With 2056 you just take your chances whatever you do. 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.