Missed game

[mohitz]

(1♣) - p - (p)- X

(1♠) - p - (2♠) - 3♥

all pass

 

[hv=d=e&v=n&n=saxhaqjxxdakxxxck&s=sxxh9xxxdqjcqjxxx]133|200|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

[billw55]

Some for both. North could choose 3♣ instead of 3♥, or unusual 2NT, to show a red two-suiter; South could push to 4♥ over 3♥.

[pooltuna]

(1♣) - p - (p)- X

(1♠) - p - (2♠) - 3♥

all pass

 

[hv=d=e&v=n&n=saxhaqjxxdakxxxck&s=sxxh9xxxdqjcqjxxx]133|200|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

I would assign all the blame to Foghorn J. Leghorn who clearly was sitting South

[ggwhiz]

3h is a REALLY big bid on this auction and south has plenty to raise.

 

The QJ of diamonds rate to be worth gold and the doubleton spade is another good plus value because of the 4th trump.

[hanp]

North should double 2S and south should raise 3H.

[jjbrr]

North should double 2S and south should raise 3H.

Han: 1

Bridge Problems: 0

[jdonn]

SOUTH?!?!

 

Btw don't agree that north should double 2♠, although I'm not so sure what that double should mean anyway so I could be wrong. I think it's more of a hand that's happy for partner to pass though (expecting more than a doubleton spade), not just takeout for the red suits.

[Apollo81]

South should raise even without the ♣QJ

[kenrexford]

Kind of funny.

 

Recently, a post that 1♠-P-2♠-2NT is often treated as Michaels these days.

 

Seems like 1♣-P-P-X-P-1♠-P-2♠-2NT would apply equally, and more obviously, with the minor even known now, and yet no comments?

 

Seems like a good auction to me, if X...2NT shows hearts and diamonds in this contextual sequence.

[ArtK78]

It is hard to imagine a hand for North that is consistent with the bidding which will not produce at least reasonable play for game opposite the South hand.

 

Assigning blame to North means that he has to bid game on his own. I will not go that far.

 

Does a 3♣ bid by North show this hand? I think that 3♣ would be a maximum confusion bid. I can't imagine that North would have clubs on that auction, but South could become confused. I like North's choice of 3♥.

[billw55]

It is hard to imagine a hand for North that is consistent with the bidding which will not produce at least reasonable play for game opposite the South hand.

 

Assigning blame to North means that he has to bid game on his own.  I will not go that far.

 

Does a 3♣ bid by North show this hand?  I think that 3♣ would be a maximum confusion bid.  I can't imagine that North would have clubs on that auction, but South could become confused.  I like North's choice of 3♥.

I'm not a big fan of 3♥. It's not terrible, but from south's seat I would read this sequence as a strong one-suiter. I would still raise to 4♥, but not without doubt. Whereas if north shows a strong red two-suiter, then it is crystal clear how good the ♦QJ is. Helping partner to do the right thing (even when he should anyway) is good bridge.

[aguahombre]

Someone mentioned 1C P P 2NT being unusual. For us it would be the "add a king" balanced 2NT opening hand --1NT=12-14; X and then NT=15-17; 2NT 18-20, etc.

 

This one looks like it has to start with a double. If the auction developes as it did, I really like 2NT by the doubler showing a monster for the reds. A second X instead would be a convertable monster.

 

but, whatever --South has to raise to 4H on the principle that it probably won't make 3 :wacko:

[655321]

but, whatever --South has to raise to 4H on the principle that it probably won't make 3 :wacko:

Not sure if you are saying that this is one of those hands where even 3♥ might go down, so you might as well bid 4. If so I disagree - South should raise to 4♥ on the grounds that he expects to make 10 tricks very often.

[aguahombre]

but, whatever --South has to raise to 4H on the principle that it probably won't make 3 :rolleyes:

Not sure if you are saying that this is one of those hands where even 3♥ might go down, so you might as well bid 4. If so I disagree - South should raise to 4♥ on the grounds that he expects to make 10 tricks very often.

obviously not on this hand....but maybe on the one North is showing on the auction.

[Fluffy]

I very much dislike 2NT with north's hand on the second round, partner wil give a preference and we won't know what to do next.

 

north has a problem, and 3♥ might not be best, clearly there are alternatives, but south was playing another game.

[Codo]

North should show a two suiter first round if this was possible. If this was not possible, his bidding was fine.

 

South bidding was a great effort to make E/W happy. He succeeded.

[Free]

North had some alternatives, but his choices were ok. South on the other hand has an easy raise to 4♥. I blame South 100%

[ONEferBRID]

( 1A ) - p - ( p ) - 2NT = natural ( not unusual) in balancing seat.

 

( 1A ) - p - ( p ) - X = T/O , whether you like it or not here;

and continuing:

( 1B ) -p -( 2B ) - X = still T/O...now for the remaining 2 suits.