dcohio Posted December 5, 2009 Report Share Posted December 5, 2009 [hv=d=n&v=n&s=saqjt6h9763dqt6c3]133|100|Scoring: MPSitting south partner deals and bidding goes: 1D-(p)-1S-(2c)2S-(p)-4S-(p)p -(5c)-???[/hv] Result: I doubled, 5♣ makes E/W for -580. Partner has K974, K2, AK9754, 4. 5♠ makes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted December 5, 2009 Report Share Posted December 5, 2009 Pass is forcing here and I think this is a good hand for a pass. Let partner make the decision. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenrexford Posted December 6, 2009 Report Share Posted December 6, 2009 Partner does not have a 2♠ call, IMO. If I had to select an even number of spades, I'd bid 4♠ with that hand. I mean, look at what Opener has. His pure LTC with five losers (two spades, one heart, one diamond, and one club). A "normal response" usually provides two covers. so, game should make. Give partner a nice minimum like AQxx in spades, and you need diamonds working out and the heart King right. Plus, things should work out. When RHO makes a two-level overcall, they have points. So, the heart Ace is more likely placed right. Plus, diamonds look nice. If partner has just two of them, you might get to ruff out the diamond loser. If three small, diamonds could split 2-2. So, the major problem with this sequence is that 2♠ was a gross underbid. Assessing results after the early auction goes off the rails is a bad idea. You just don't know what would have happened in the situation where partner actually has a 2♠ bid. Maybe 5♠ cannot make, but partner takes more tricks in diamonds, because everything splits better for defense. I mean, give partner just AKxx in diamonds, another heart, and another club, and he has his bid. But, then 5♣ is more in jeopardy because the opponents need to find places for two more diamonds, and they have one fewer club. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suokko Posted December 6, 2009 Report Share Posted December 6, 2009 End of world? I agree with everything what Ken said :ph34r: But I would jut bid 3♠ in practice unless there was rule stopping me from doing it. I need partner to have either 5th trump or something good so ♦ runs in case my hand is forced with ♣. But if I have to choose between 2 and 4 I would pick the game. And in given auction I hit 5♣. Too bad if it makes but we might not even make 4♠ and I don't want to invite partner to bid 5♠ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted December 6, 2009 Report Share Posted December 6, 2009 I'd pass, which is forcing because the auction says that they're saving. If partner has club wastage, he'll double. If he has something like Kxxx Kx AKxx xxx, he'll bid 5♠, which is probably making given the bidding. If he has no club wastage and no heart winner, there's a possibility that 5♣ is making, and if it isn't the penalty will be inadequate. Hence going down in 5♠ may be right, or not much much worse than defending. Looking at it another way, if the bidding had gone 1♦ pass 1♠ 2♣ 2♠ 5♣I'd have bid 5♠ because of the double fit, hoping that partner's values weren't in clubs. This is the same sequence except that I can ask him where his values are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pooltuna Posted December 6, 2009 Report Share Posted December 6, 2009 Partner does not have a 2♠ call, IMO. If I had to select an even number of spades, I'd bid 4♠ with that hand. I mean, look at what Opener has. His pure LTC with five losers (two spades, one heart, one diamond, and one club). A "normal response" usually provides two covers. so, game should make. Give partner a nice minimum like AQxx in spades, and you need diamonds working out and the heart King right. Plus, things should work out. When RHO makes a two-level overcall, they have points. So, the heart Ace is more likely placed right. Plus, diamonds look nice. If partner has just two of them, you might get to ruff out the diamond loser. If three small, diamonds could split 2-2. So, the major problem with this sequence is that 2♠ was a gross underbid. [snip] By agreement with my favorite partner (RIP) the opener should have used the "convention with no name." With the number of GF support showing hands that exist we need some differentiation. So to expect a stronger hand for a 4♦ bid seems unreasonable to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcphee Posted December 6, 2009 Report Share Posted December 6, 2009 Double is clear. We have advanced to a game which could easily have no play, to make a forcing pass is just silly, or the declarer of spades must believe they are capable of incredible card play and the opponents are 2 caddies who have never played before. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Codo Posted December 7, 2009 Report Share Posted December 7, 2009 A forcing pass is clear, anything else is horrible. And yes partners 2 Spade bid was from outer space or from someone who count HCPS and stops his hand evaluation there. 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.