dburn Posted April 30, 2010 Report Share Posted April 30, 2010 [hv=d=s&v=b&s=sakj53hjdq96caj43]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv]You, South, open 1♠ and partner bids 2♦, game-forcing. What call do you make? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
y66 Posted April 30, 2010 Report Share Posted April 30, 2010 3D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mohitz Posted April 30, 2010 Report Share Posted April 30, 2010 I guess this depends on agreements. In my agreements, 2♦ delivered a 5 card suit. I bid 3♦ showing extras and at least 3 card support. If i had one more diamond instead of club, I would have bid 3♥. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awm Posted April 30, 2010 Report Share Posted April 30, 2010 2♠; for me 2♦ is usually (but not always) five, but a direct raise shows four-card support in any case. If partner bids 2NT next then I'll try 3♦ which should describe my degree of fit nicely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdanno Posted April 30, 2010 Report Share Posted April 30, 2010 I understand 3D and I understand 3C, planning to bid diamonds next. I don't understand 2S. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dburn Posted April 30, 2010 Author Report Share Posted April 30, 2010 I guess this depends on agreements. In my agreements, 2♦ delivered a 5 card suit.Oh, we didn't have much in the way of sophistication. For example, with: ♠xx ♥AQxx ♦AKJx ♣xxx we would respond 2♦ to 1♠. I don't know what you would do, but it seems to me that you must have to perform some contortions if 2♦ "delivered a 5 card suit". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted April 30, 2010 Report Share Posted April 30, 2010 <!-- ONEHAND begin --><table border='1'> <tr> <td> <table> <tr> <td> Dealer: </td> <td> South </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Vul: </td> <td> Both </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Scoring: </td> <td> IMP </td> </tr> </table> </td> <td> <table> <tr> <th> <span class='spades'> ♠ </span> </th> <td> AKJ53 </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='hearts'> ♥ </span> </th> <td> J </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='diamonds'> ♦ </span> </th> <td> Q96 </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='clubs'> ♣ </span> </th> <td> AJ43 </td> </tr> </table> </td> <td> </td> </tr> </table><!-- ONEHAND end -->You, South, open 1♠ and partner bids 2♦, game-forcing. What call do you make? LOL I just watched this movie the other night..... a truly great movie........I think 1951...so I can tell you 3d (not extras) :) yes 2d can be 4 but if you saw the movie you will think this version very unlikely....:) ================= pard will assume we have 11-13 with 3 or 4d....... our problems are only starting.....:( dreaded inbetween hand.....tough... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted April 30, 2010 Report Share Posted April 30, 2010 3D is just fine, in our sys. 3C if 2D could not be five of them. 2S doesn't work for me, when I could high reverse 3C in a 2/1 style, so that would be far behind the other calls The hand dburn gives is one of the many reasons we don't play J2N. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jillybean Posted April 30, 2010 Report Share Posted April 30, 2010 Easy 3♦ , in my system 2♦ promises 5 On this hand ♠xx ♥AQxx ♦AKJx ♣xxx we would bid 2♣* gf, could be as short as 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dburn Posted April 30, 2010 Author Report Share Posted April 30, 2010 I understand 3D and I understand 3C, planning to bid diamonds next. I don't understand 2S.Not sure I understand it either - certainly didn't consider bidding it. A question that became relevant in the later going was this: suppose you have ♠AKJxx ♥x ♦Qx ♣QJ10xx After 1♠-2♦, should you bid 2♠ or 3♣? Addendum: let me rephrase that, since I cannot bear the smartass answer "yes, you should bid 2♠ or 3♣." Which of 2♠ and 3♣ should you bid? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkDean Posted April 30, 2010 Report Share Posted April 30, 2010 I would bid 3♣. If partner bids anything but 3NT, I will bid 4♦ and think I am well placed. If partner bids 3NT...well, let's hope partner does not do that to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dburn Posted April 30, 2010 Author Report Share Posted April 30, 2010 I would bid 3♣. If partner bids anything but 3NT, I will bid 4♦ and think I am well placed. If partner bids 3NT...well, let's hope partner does not do that to me.Very well. Partner bids 3♥, and you bid a "well-placed" 4♦. This was the sequence actually followed at the table, but I was not feeling quite as smug about it as I might have done. For example, might I not bid the same way with: ♠AKxxx ♥xx ♦Qx ♣AKxx? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkDean Posted April 30, 2010 Report Share Posted April 30, 2010 I would bid 3♣. If partner bids anything but 3NT, I will bid 4♦ and think I am well placed. If partner bids 3NT...well, let's hope partner does not do that to me.Very well. Partner bids 3♥, and you bid a "well-placed" 4♦. This was the sequence actually followed at the table, but I was not feeling quite as smug about it as I might have done. For example, might I not bid the same way with: ♠AKxxx ♥xx ♦Qx ♣AKxx? I would tend to bid 3♠ with that hand, but it is true, you will not always have as pure of a hand for 4♦. However, I do not see that as a reason not to bid it when I do have the hand in the OP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted April 30, 2010 Report Share Posted April 30, 2010 I would bid 3♣. If partner bids anything but 3NT, I will bid 4♦ and think I am well placed. If partner bids 3NT...well, let's hope partner does not do that to me.Very well. Partner bids 3♥, and you bid a "well-placed" 4♦. This was the sequence actually followed at the table, but I was not feeling quite as smug about it as I might have done. For example, might I not bid the same way with: ♠AKxxx ♥xx ♦Qx ♣AKxx? I would tend to bid 3♠ with that hand, but it is true, you will not always have as pure of a hand for 4♦. However, I do not see that as a reason not to bid it when I do have the hand in the OP. 3NT on that sequence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted April 30, 2010 Report Share Posted April 30, 2010 again I got an ugly inbetween hand: 4c 1s=2d3d=3h4c 4c should/may alert pard I got more than 11-13...... 2d is not crap....3d can be...and pard assumes.roshomon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P_Marlowe Posted April 30, 2010 Report Share Posted April 30, 2010 Hi, my p would bid 3D, I prefer 3C. With kind regardsMarlowe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted April 30, 2010 Report Share Posted April 30, 2010 Hi, my p would bid 3D, I prefer 3C. With kind regardsMarlowe what your pard prefers does not matter.... see the movie....roshomon..........that is not the issue...sigh\what you prefer ...does...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluecalm Posted April 30, 2010 Report Share Posted April 30, 2010 Oh, we didn't have much in the way of sophistication. For example, with: ♠xx ♥AQxx ♦AKJx ♣xxx we would respond 2♦ to 1♠. I don't know what you would do, but it seems to me that you must have to perform some contortions if 2♦ "delivered a 5 card suit". 2♣ for me (because it contains balanced gf hand by agreement). Actually I consider 2♦ just a bad bid/system design.You will have a chance to play in ♦ if partner have 4 of them anyway and there is no reason to design system in such a way that you tell opponents what you have without much benefits for your side. In hand in question I bid 3♦ which I hope promises extras. If it doesn't promise extras I guess I will go with 3♣. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted April 30, 2010 Report Share Posted April 30, 2010 Oh, we didn't have much in the way of sophistication. For example, with: ♠xx ♥AQxx ♦AKJx ♣xxx we would respond 2♦ to 1♠. I don't know what you would do, but it seems to me that you must have to perform some contortions if 2♦ "delivered a 5 card suit". 2♣ for me (because it contains balanced gf hand by agreement). Actually I consider 2♦ just a bad bid/system design.You will have a chance to play in ♦ if partner have 4 of them anyway and there is no reason to design system in such a way that you tell opponents what you have without much benefits for your side. 2c? no wonder forums confuse me.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peachy Posted April 30, 2010 Report Share Posted April 30, 2010 3C. Hand is strong enough for this. In my methods which do not include artificial 2C or other gadgets (assumedly OP would have said if they had such methods, so they don't either), 2D does not promise five card suit so raising diamonds with only 3-card support is premature. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peachy Posted April 30, 2010 Report Share Posted April 30, 2010 ♠AKJxx ♥x ♦Qx ♣QJ10xx After 1♠-2♦, should you bid 2♠ or 3♣? Addendum: let me rephrase that, since I cannot bear the smartass answer "yes, you should bid 2♠ or 3♣." Which of 2♠ and 3♣ should you bid? I bid 2S, which is the default minimum in my methods when one unbid suit is not stopped. New suit on the three level shows a better hand than this. Even if default minimum was agreed as 2NT, I would still bid 2S for lack of better bid - 2NT would be misleading on shape and 3C misleading on general strength. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Echognome Posted April 30, 2010 Report Share Posted April 30, 2010 Playing 2♣/1M shows GF Balanced or Clubs (so that 2♦ shows 5+) I bid 3♦. Playing a version of 2/1 where 2♦ shows 4+ and a 2M rebid is catch-all, I bid 2♠. Playing a version of 2/1 where 2♦ shows 4+ and a 2M rebid shows 6+, I bid 3♣. There are so many different flavors of 2/1, I think it's difficult to answer the question without being more constrained by your particular system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Codo Posted April 30, 2010 Report Share Posted April 30, 2010 3 ♣ looked obvious as long as you have no agreement that 2 ♣ from partner had been artifical and 2 ♦ shows 5.I raise partners diamonds later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the hog Posted April 30, 2010 Report Share Posted April 30, 2010 3C for me. I have the extras necessary to bd 3C. I also don't understand 2S. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Posted April 30, 2010 Report Share Posted April 30, 2010 If you don't have much agreements on 2/1s, then I'd bid 3♣ which is what I have: extra's and 4+♣... 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.