mohitz Posted May 31, 2010 Report Share Posted May 31, 2010 IMPs, we are vul, they are not. We pick up ♠Jx ♥ATx ♦AJxx ♣AKJx (2♠) - p - (p) - X(p) - 2N - (p) - ? We X in balancing seat and partner bids 2N lebensohl. What is our bid? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted May 31, 2010 Report Share Posted May 31, 2010 I chicken out. 3♣. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Posted May 31, 2010 Report Share Posted May 31, 2010 3♣, I really don't like this hand to bid something else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jillybean Posted May 31, 2010 Report Share Posted May 31, 2010 ditto Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neilkaz Posted May 31, 2010 Report Share Posted May 31, 2010 3♣ for me as I think game is a clear underdog here and if PD is broke it could be expensive to bid on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
campboy Posted May 31, 2010 Report Share Posted May 31, 2010 Isn't the whole point of playing lebensohl that we can stop in 3m with this kind of hand? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mohitz Posted May 31, 2010 Author Report Share Posted May 31, 2010 Alright, since this is unanimous, let me rephrase the question. With 2344 shape, what is the minimum hand that does not bid 3♣ here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted May 31, 2010 Report Share Posted May 31, 2010 Alright, since this is unanimous, let me rephrase the question. With 2344 shape, what is the minimum hand that does not bid 3♣ here? The given hand is close to the "bubble", IMO. A Leben 2NT opposite a direct double has a range of, say zero to 8. This is too wide, so we make an artificial floor of 3. A Leben 2NT opposite a balancing double of 2M has a range of, say, zero to 10. We make an artificial floor of 6. This seems realistic to us. The given hand is not a great one for trick-taking, and we go low. "We"=us, not necessarily the sane world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awm Posted May 31, 2010 Report Share Posted May 31, 2010 I don't really play different ranges opposite a direct and balancing double. In part this is because I'm not balancing a lot lighter than I double in direct seat over a weak two bid (this is different from an opening for a number of reasons, including that we are several levels higher and that RHO is more likely to have strength because opener is more limited). The lebensohl bid is normally 0-a bad 8 whereas a direct bid is a good 8-11. While the given hand can easily make game opposite a maximum lebensohl bid, you'll have a lot of trouble opposite a more typical 5-count. So I'd accept the puppet to 3♣. Rejecting the lebensohl puppet should show more like a 20-count (maybe a really good 19). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdanno Posted May 31, 2010 Report Share Posted May 31, 2010 Agree with Adam, this isn't even barely close for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mycroft Posted May 31, 2010 Report Share Posted May 31, 2010 Yuck. 3C. What game are we making if we push that partner won't bid over 3C (i.e. 3NT after partner shows a spade stopper)? The hand you want partner to have is, say, xxx KQxxxx xx xx, maybe KJxxxx. That's a pretty small window to hit. Caveat: I like to keep my actions over weak 2s sounder than most; so this hand really isn't much stronger than minimum. Add to that the fact that there's 2-dead spades (Yeah, Jx turns Qxx into a nice holding, but how is partner going to get that?) and the 4-card suits aren't majors... When would I break? x AJTx AJxx AKJx might be a good start, but I find even that too small. What would I bid? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mycroft Posted May 31, 2010 Report Share Posted May 31, 2010 edit: deleted doublepost. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peachy Posted May 31, 2010 Report Share Posted May 31, 2010 3C. I expect this to be unanimous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted May 31, 2010 Report Share Posted May 31, 2010 Agree with Adam, this isn't even barely close for me. I have no idea what that means but I still agree. 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.