Phil Posted August 29, 2009 Report Share Posted August 29, 2009 Matchpoints, nobody vul ♠9xx ♥KT ♦AKJT9xx ♣A pass - (1♠) - ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdanno Posted August 29, 2009 Report Share Posted August 29, 2009 2♦, wouldn't have occurred to me that there is an alternative. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwnn Posted August 29, 2009 Report Share Posted August 29, 2009 2♦, but 3♠ isn't that bad I think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pooltuna Posted August 29, 2009 Report Share Posted August 29, 2009 2nd choice is X and relatively close. I really hate 2♦ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OleBerg Posted August 29, 2009 Report Share Posted August 29, 2009 How about a confident 3NT. They always lead another suit, unless openers partner has a solid sequence. Wouldn't at IMP's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jlall Posted August 29, 2009 Report Share Posted August 29, 2009 2♦, wouldn't have occurred to me that there is an alternative. yeah this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy_h Posted August 29, 2009 Report Share Posted August 29, 2009 2nd choice is X and relatively close. I really hate 2♦ I don't quite understand X. Like cherdanno said, I don't see any alternative to 2 diamonds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 agree with Arend Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cascade Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 That suit I have lots of its diamonds isn't it ... ok i will bid them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the hog Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 Uh 2D. What else? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtvesuvius Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 hmm... I like fancy stuff, but... I have lots of diamonds, so I will show lots of diamonds. 2♦. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sathyab Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 2♦, wouldn't have occurred to me that there is an alternative.May be we should start a sub-poll for those who couldn't think of anything but 2♦. Here's the virtual poll question: "No alternative to 2♦ because you believe that:" with choices below: ♣) My diamond suit is not solid enough even if partner has a stopper ♦) Partner being a passed hand, I'm not sure I want to be 4♦ when he shows no stopper. ♥) The auction never goes 3♥ or 3♠ on my left, making it really hard for me to get to 3nt. So I don't worry about such situations. ♠) When I look at a lot of cards in a suit, I just overcall that suit at the appropriate level, knowing that we'll always get to the right contract eventually (I would have trouble making up this choice, but this is derived from one of the replies to the post). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the hog Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 2♦, wouldn't have occurred to me that there is an alternative.May be we should start a sub-poll for those who couldn't think of anything but 2♦. Here's the virtual poll question: "No alternative to 2♦ because you believe that:" with choices below: ♣) My diamond suit is not solid enough even if partner has a stopper ♦) Partner being a passed hand, I'm not sure I want to be 4♦ when he shows no stopper. ♥) The auction never goes 3♥ or 3♠ on my left, making it really hard for me to get to 3nt. So I don't worry about such situations. ♠) When I look at a lot of cards in a suit, I just overcall that suit at the appropriate level, knowing that we'll always get to the right contract eventually (I would have trouble making up this choice, but this is derived from one of the replies to the post). Presumably you are arguing for a bid other than 2D? As your Ds are not solid and you have problems on lead through dummy's Hs, I think a 3NT suggestion, (such as 3S), deserves a lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wclass___ Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 Here's the virtual poll question: "No alternative to 2♦ because you know that:" NT) moust of other players as well as members of this forum will also bid 2♦, so you can relatively safe take ave++ on this board via further bidding judgement or cardplay. Seeking input from anyone who doesn't frequently "wtp", "Lol" or post to merely "Agree with ..." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pooltuna Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 2♦, wouldn't have occurred to me that there is an alternative.May be we should start a sub-poll for those who couldn't think of anything but 2♦. Here's the virtual poll question: "No alternative to 2♦ because you believe that:" with choices below: ♣) My diamond suit is not solid enough even if partner has a stopper ♦) Partner being a passed hand, I'm not sure I want to be 4♦ when he shows no stopper. ♥) The auction never goes 3♥ or 3♠ on my left, making it really hard for me to get to 3nt. So I don't worry about such situations. ♠) When I look at a lot of cards in a suit, I just overcall that suit at the appropriate level, knowing that we'll always get to the right contract eventually (I would have trouble making up this choice, but this is derived from one of the replies to the post).You forgot these additional poll choices: ♣♣ I don't believe in percentages they are too hard to calculate ♦♦ If my suit isn't AKQJT98 it isn't solid enough to bid 3♠ ♥♥ A simulation? Isn't that when 2 players play a card at the same time? ♠♠ So what if partner holds ♠Ax ♥Jxx ♦xxx ♣xxxxx I will make 2♦ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
655321 Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 Agree with Arend. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 Seeking input from anyone who doesn't frequently "wtp", "Lol" or post to merely "Agree with ..." I'm getting crazy, where did you quote this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwnn Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 Read the fine print. :rolleyes: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neilkaz Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 2♦ as this isn't strong enough for me to take more aggressive action. I am allowed to hold a max when I overcall. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdanno Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 Seeking input from anyone who doesn't frequently "wtp", "Lol" or post to merely "Agree with ..." I'm getting crazy, where did you quote this? It's in a signature - maybe you have turned signatures off? (There was a good reason to turn off signatures a while ago...) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pooltuna Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 2♦ as this isn't strong enough for me to take more aggressive action. I am allowed to hold a max when I overcall. This hand is not just about strength. It is about tricks if ♦ come in as they rate to do (i.e.>50% of the time) then you have 8 tricks in NT so partner needs only produce 1 more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 ♠♠ So what if partner holds ♠Ax ♥Jxx ♦xxx ♣xxxxx I will make 2♦ That's a routine raise to 3♦. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pooltuna Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 ♠♠ So what if partner holds ♠Ax ♥Jxx ♦xxx ♣xxxxx I will make 2♦ That's a routine raise to 3♦.how about ♠Ax ♥Jxxx ♦Q ♣xxxxxx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted August 31, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 ♠♠ So what if partner holds ♠Ax ♥Jxx ♦xxx ♣xxxxx I will make 2♦ That's a routine raise to 3♦.how about ♠Ax ♥Jxxx ♦Q ♣xxxxxx 5-9 counts with spade stops and doubleton diamonds should be the main genre of hands that the 2♦ bidders should be concerned with. Not so strange a hand is it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TylerE Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 I think 2♦ is obvious. Those straining to get to get to 3NT aren't considering the scoring. At MP I'm mainly trying to go plus on this board...I think that's enough. At IMPs my considerations would be different. Besides, it's certainly not like 2♦ bars partner. I'm allowed to be max for my bid occasionally. 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.