hanp Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 xxxxK10Qxx108xx 2C - 2D (values)2H (forces 2S) - 2S (forced)3C (natural, hearts and clubs) - ?? Pairs, forgot about vulnerability. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jlall Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 I'd def bid 3H. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 not used of the methods, but I think this showes longer or equal hearts, I'd also bid 3♥ focusing on the most likelly game. With something stronger (add ♣Q for example), 4♣ would be more appealing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 3♥, partner can still show more about his hand. Eventually we can still get to 6♣ in many cases if necessary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 4♣, focussing on the most likely slam. Opposite AKx AQJxx x AKQx, which is not necessarily a 2♣ opener, and where 2/5 of our points are completely wasted, slam is in the high 60s. That heart holding is really good for a club contact. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 I'd def bid 3H. Me too. I am close to a minimum and its pairs. 4♣ is chasing moonbeams. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apollo81 Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 Agree with gnasher, I think slam will make pretty often. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jlall Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 Opposite AKx AQJxx x AKQx, which is not necessarily a 2♣ opener How is this not necessarily a 2C opener? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtK78 Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 Opposite AKx AQJxx x AKQx, which is not necessarily a 2♣ opener How is this not necessarily a 2C opener? And I thought my 2♣ opening requirements were high. Absolute 2♣ opener. As for the original problem, I bid 3♥. I have one sure cover card (the ♥K) opposite a 3 or less loser hand (the typical loser count for a 2♣ opening). The ♦Q is a potential cover card if partner has diamond length. In any event, it is not clear that slam is in the picture. For example, partner could have a solid 2♣ opener like this one: AKQ AQJxx x AKxx Slam is virtually hopeless on this hand (on a non-diamond lead 6♣ has a chance). If partner moves towards slam I will try to offer a choice of slams. If the club fit is solid, clubs is likely to be a better place to play slam. For example: x AQJxx Ax AKQxx Now this hand is a borderline 2♣ opening, but 6♣ rates to be easy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 rather than offer a choice Art, if given the opportunity I will try to impose clubs for slam :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtK78 Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 rather than offer a choice Art, if given the opportunity I will try to impose clubs for slam :) If you bid 3♥ over 3♣, can you really impose clubs as the trump suit later in the auction? If not, do you recommend bidding 4♣ now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 yeah yeah, I know what you mean, was just a joke. If partner bids 4♣ next I think it is time to make it clear that we wanna play clubs, with a raise to the 6 level he should get the message. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 Opposite AKx AQJxx x AKQx, which is not necessarily a 2♣ opener How is this not necessarily a 2C opener? It seems to have grown in high cards since I created it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 For example, partner could have a solid 2♣ opener like this one: AKQ AQJxx x AKxx Slam is virtually hopeless on this hand (on a non-diamond lead 6♣ has a chance). So what? 4♣ doesn't compel us to bid slam. It's true that 5♣ is a worse game than 4♥, but that's what happens if you construct a hand where none of his minor honours are in clubs. If he had AKQ AQxxx x AKJx we'd be better off in 5♣ than 4♥. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeh Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 I would bid 3♥. This shouldn't rule out a club contract, altho we may need sophisticated agreements, or luck, to get back to the suit. I have never discussed this with any partner, and I know the sequences are not directly comparable, but in a sequence such as 1♥ 1♠ 3♣ 3♥, virtually all experts would, I think, stall with 3♥ on most hands containing K10 in hearts and xxxx in clubs. I appreciate that one major difference is that after a kokish auction, 3♣ is 'real' whereas the jumpshift may be a distortion necessitated by the need to create a force. However, the same needs apply: a desire to keep the bidding low rather than committing to a suit that may be far too weak for slam or even game purposes. In addition, this is mps where 10 tricks in hearts outscores 11 in clubs. I do think that opener, with a slam suitable 2-suiter, should bid 4♣ naturally rather than as a cue bid. Then we raise to 5♣ or 6♣ depending on our partnership's view of the minimum strength of a 2-suited 2♣ opening....it should have play even if it is poor...they probably have to guess which pointed suit to lead to have any chance of beating it. The need to use 4♣ over 3♥ as natural is not too much of a problem since he will rarely have unilateral slam interest without a spade control, so he can start slamtries with 3♠...which I do NOT think should be natural, patterning out...or am I allowing this hand and auction to influence me? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nige1 Posted April 1, 2010 Report Share Posted April 1, 2010 xxxx K10 Qxx 108xx2C - 2D (values)2H (forces 2S) - 2S (forced)3C (natural, hearts and clubs) - ??Pairs, forgot about vulnerability. I like the Kokish convention. IMO, with a ♣ fit but without ♥ support, you should try to bid at the 3-level to keep 3N in the frame. Hence, bids at the 4-level normally show a double fit. Anyway, whatever it means, a 4♣ bid doesn't preclude either player from suggesting 4♥ as a contract -- by bidding it. In principle, a return to the major at the 4 level offers a choice of games. Hence ...4♣ = 10, 4♥ = 9, 3♥ = 5. BTW, my marks are simply a way of expressing the degree of my preference between calls that I consider making. Not a patronising attempt to rate other poster's comments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdanno Posted April 1, 2010 Report Share Posted April 1, 2010 For example, partner could have a solid 2♣ opener like this one: AKQ AQJxx x AKxx Slam is virtually hopeless on this hand (on a non-diamond lead 6♣ has a chance). So what? 4♣ doesn't compel us to bid slam. It's true that 5♣ is a worse game than 4♥, but that's what happens if you construct a hand where none of his minor honours are in clubs. If he had AKQ AQxxx x AKJx we'd be better off in 5♣ than 4♥. I think the scoring is matchpoints. I would raise to 4♣ at IMPs but at matchpoints raising clubs almost seems like betting we have slam. Last time I thought about this auction I thought 3♥ should show a fit. The difference to the jump shift auction is obvious - we are much more likely to have a heart fit (as we couldn't raise hearts before), and partner is unlimited. I think showing a fit here is really important. Maybe I would bid 3H anyway, or I would bid 4C and hope partner can bid 4H (which I would pass), I still don't know... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Codo Posted April 1, 2010 Report Share Posted April 1, 2010 At imps always 4♣, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hanp Posted April 1, 2010 Author Report Share Posted April 1, 2010 It's not imps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karlson Posted April 1, 2010 Report Share Posted April 1, 2010 Last time I thought about this auction I thought 3♥ should show a fit. The difference to the jump shift auction is obvious - we are much more likely to have a heart fit (as we couldn't raise hearts before), and partner is unlimited. I think showing a fit here is really important. Maybe I would bid 3H anyway, or I would bid 4C and hope partner can bid 4H (which I would pass), I still don't know... Or you could play the kokish version I like where 3s shows a real fit and 3h can be a doubleton (and you show spades by bidding 2h-2n). I would also bid 4c and hope that partner bids 4h. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted April 1, 2010 Report Share Posted April 1, 2010 I think the scoring is matchpoints. I would raise to 4♣ at IMPs but at matchpoints raising clubs almost seems like betting we have slam. I hadn't noticed that. I agree with 3♥ at MPs. Wouldn't it be nice if we could play IMPs during the bidding but matchpoints during the play? 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.