Mbodell Posted May 9, 2010 Report Share Posted May 9, 2010 [hv=d=s&v=n&n=saj2hj8754d62c973&w=sk764h962dq9854c6&e=sqt85hkqdajt3ckj5&s=s93hat3dk7caqt842]399|300|Scoring: MP1nt(12-14)-P-2♦(transfer)-X2♥-3♦-P-...3nt(slow)P-...4♠(slow)All pass[/hv] 4♠-1, NS claims 3nt would have been down a lot more than 1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMB1 Posted May 9, 2010 Report Share Posted May 9, 2010 Before I would adjust, I would ask the meaning of X, 2♥, 3♦, and 3NT (in the context of the earlier X). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluejak Posted May 9, 2010 Report Share Posted May 9, 2010 Fair comments, but I think it not unreasonable to guess that you will get the answers dbl shows he would have doubled 1NT, 2♥ shows three hearts, 3♦ shows some values and is natural but not forcing, and 3NT is to play. Would West pass a "fast, happy" 3NT as John Probst used to put it? Certainly! So I would adjust to some weighted score of 3NT down four, three, two and so on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barmar Posted May 10, 2010 Report Share Posted May 10, 2010 Doesn't double of a transfer bid usually show length and strength in the transfer suit, with little implied about the rest of the hand? It's generally intended as a lead director, with possible sactifice suggestions if partner has a fit. So 3♦ is just a "raise" of East's diamonds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mbodell Posted May 10, 2010 Author Report Share Posted May 10, 2010 Nobody at the table asked about any of the bids until after the hand. West at first thought the X showed diamonds (lead direct, some values and hence the 3♦ was a "raise"), but when 3♦ was pulled to 3nt worried that maybe the X was take out of hearts and showed 4♠. Bidding 2♥ over the double probably shows 3+ card support for N/S. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted May 10, 2010 Report Share Posted May 10, 2010 Doesn't double of a transfer bid usually show length and strength in the transfer suit, with little implied about the rest of the hand? It's generally intended as a lead director, with possible sactifice suggestions if partner has a fit. So 3♦ is just a "raise" of East's diamonds. This is not obvious when opps play a weak NT. Many play the dbl as showing a hand that would have doubled 1NT for penalties. But Mbodell's explanation makes sense, otherwise the 4♠ bid is hard to explain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peachy Posted May 10, 2010 Report Share Posted May 10, 2010 I would adjust to 3NT down however many that is. To me it is obvious that Doubler used UI to bid 4S on K764. He would have passed an in-tempo 3NT and even if he hadn't, Pass is very clearly a LA not suggested by the UI while bidding is strongly suggested over pass, by the BIT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted May 10, 2010 Report Share Posted May 10, 2010 So I would adjust to some weighted score of 3NT down four, three, two and so on. No you wouldn't, ACBL... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluejak Posted May 10, 2010 Report Share Posted May 10, 2010 Damn, sorry, I do not usually make that mistake. Ok, Four down for the offending side, three down for the non-offending side. <mutter> <mutter> another black mark in my book. ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trinidad Posted May 11, 2010 Report Share Posted May 11, 2010 Doesn't double of a transfer bid usually show length and strength in the transfer suit, with little implied about the rest of the hand? It's generally intended as a lead director, with possible sactifice suggestions if partner has a fit. So 3♦ is just a "raise" of East's diamonds. This is not obvious when opps play a weak NT. Many play the dbl as showing a hand that would have doubled 1NT for penalties. But Mbodell's explanation makes sense, otherwise the 4♠ bid is hard to explain. It also means that pass was not an LA for this West player at the point that he bid 4♠. Probably EW are not very experienced in defending against a weak NT (ACBL). Rik Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peachy Posted May 11, 2010 Report Share Posted May 11, 2010 Probably EW are not very experienced in defending against a weak NT (ACBL). Rik Also probably not experienced in the UI laws = how to act when one has received UI from partner. 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.