rduran1216 Posted August 13, 2010 Report Share Posted August 13, 2010 [hv=d=w&v=n&s=skjhadaqxxcakq10xx]133|100|Scoring: MP[/hv] Auction has gone 2H p p ? The 2H bidder is a decent player. Playing with someone playing a vanilla card and no agreements Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted August 13, 2010 Report Share Posted August 13, 2010 Will wait til you tell us what we should have done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BudH Posted August 13, 2010 Report Share Posted August 13, 2010 Dealer: West Vul: N/S Scoring: MP ♠ KJ ♥ A ♦ AQxx ♣ AKQ10xx Auction has gone 2H p p ? The 2H bidder is a decent player. Playing with someone playing a vanilla card and no agreements4H showing slam interest in a minor. After a 4S bid, I jump to 6C. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenrexford Posted August 13, 2010 Report Share Posted August 13, 2010 This seems like another obvious Piltch 5♠ call, the modified version. Bid 5♠, showing 6-4 in the minors and ostensibly three hearts. Partner will bid 5NT without a 4-card minor (asking Opener to bid the 6-card minor) or six of the minor that he has four of. Or, 6♥ if he has 5+ hearts with no 4-card minor. I just have to be prepared to bid 6NT if partner shows hearts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluecalm Posted August 13, 2010 Report Share Posted August 13, 2010 BBO forum really is shaping my intuition. Quick look at the hand and "6♦" appears in my mind.On serious note it looks like another wtp problem. Double now and bid clubs later...If he bids lebensohl 2NT then I think 3NT should be right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwnn Posted August 13, 2010 Report Share Posted August 13, 2010 six clubs... I hereby vow not to make references to that certain hand that many people keep making references to... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P_Marlowe Posted August 13, 2010 Report Share Posted August 13, 2010 X. With kind regardsMarlowe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Posted August 13, 2010 Report Share Posted August 13, 2010 6♦ wtp? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OleBerg Posted August 13, 2010 Report Share Posted August 13, 2010 X. And my next bid will be 6♣. If partner has any imagination, he will know I have diamonds. If not he will pass (or raise). Anyway, I do not have the imagination for anything more ingenious. (If partner takes 6♣ to be voidwood, I'll try some of his medication, and have a funny night.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted August 13, 2010 Report Share Posted August 13, 2010 I double because ♠KJ can be better than ♠xxx so not so afraid of partner bidding spades many times. If I can rebid 3/4♣ showing a flexible hand partner can still escape to spades wich can be a top spot at MPs. With the majors reversed this will be tougher. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted August 13, 2010 Report Share Posted August 13, 2010 Yeah double and if p bids 3♣ or 3♠ (assuming we don't play Lebensohl) my next bid is 6♣. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ONEferBRID Posted August 13, 2010 Report Share Posted August 13, 2010 "This seems like another obvious Piltch call ", a modified ( ' Rexfordized ' ) 5♠ bid. The hand over an opening preempt does look very similar to the recent one of dubious fame: ♠ void ♥ Axx ♦ AQxx ♣ AKQ7xx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pooltuna Posted August 13, 2010 Report Share Posted August 13, 2010 Will wait til you tell us what we should have done. I thought this was a clear piltch bid...6♦ :rolleyes: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ONEferBRID Posted August 13, 2010 Report Share Posted August 13, 2010 ♠ KJ ♥ A ♦ AQxx ♣ AKQ10xx What about Leaping Michaels but incorporate allowances for a 6/4 in the minors ( something akin to Rexford's idea ): ( 2M ) - p - ( p ) - 4M! = big 2-suiter, minors( p ) - ?? ??Advancer: 4NT = no 4 card minor 5C/5D = 4+ card minor After Advancer's 4NT:Overcaller:5C/5D = long suit or better of a 5/5, non-forcing5H = slam forcing; asking for longer minor: >> 5S = longer Cl ( max = 3 cards ) >> 5NT = longer Diam ( " " " ) >> 6C = equal length Cl/Diam ( max is 3-3 ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted August 13, 2010 Report Share Posted August 13, 2010 And if I show minors with 1165 and partner is 5503, where will I get?(2♥) 4♥ 4NT5♦? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ONEferBRID Posted August 13, 2010 Report Share Posted August 13, 2010 And if I show minors with 1165 and partner is 5503, where will I get?(2♥) 4♥ 4NT5♦?Perhaps Partner corrects to 6C ( knowing it could be a 4-3 fit, but feels it's better than a 5-0 or 6-0 ) ? Where would Ken end up ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted August 13, 2010 Report Share Posted August 13, 2010 Where would Ken ever end up? I don't always take him seriously but your system suggestions seem like you mean them. For that matter, if you are 3-2 in the minors then aren't you on a total guess whether to pass or correct after 4NT and partner bids 5♣? These things just don't work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bucky Posted August 14, 2010 Report Share Posted August 14, 2010 Where would Ken ever end up? I don't always take him seriously but your system suggestions seem like you mean them. For that matter, if you are 3-2 in the minors then aren't you on a total guess whether to pass or correct after 4NT and partner bids 5♣? These things just don't work. It seems to me that over partner's 4M bid, 4NT should be "pick a minor by yourself partner", while 5C/5D shows clear preference. To require that 5C/5D show 4+ support when 4M bidder is supposed to be 5-5 or better, that doesn't seem very effective to me. I think if 4M is supposed to be big 2-minor suiter (5-5 or better, and stronger than direct 4NT overcall), then this hand doesn't qualify. I'd just jump to 6C, at least I am not torturing partner. Doubling first then bidding 6C (over partner's presumed 2S response) is OK, but if we play lebensohl and partner bids 2NT (which is likely), now I will have to make another nebulous 3H cuebid, which just adds more confusion... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ONEferBRID Posted August 14, 2010 Report Share Posted August 14, 2010 And if I show minors with 1165 and partner is 5503, where will I get?(2♥) 4♥ 4NT5♦?There is "room" over the 2H preempt to solve this problem, but not over a 2S preempt ) : ( 2H ) - p - ( p ) - 4H! ( p ) 4S! = no 4m - ( p ) - ?? ?? 4NT! ( I have 5-5 so you bid your longer minor )5C/5D ( I have 6m/4om, so I have bid my longer minor ) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - But I tend to agree it probably is not a good idea to use Leaping Michaelsfor the minors with a big 6/4 ... should be 5/5 at least. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerben42 Posted August 15, 2010 Report Share Posted August 15, 2010 Am I crazy if I just want to bid 3NT? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cascade Posted August 15, 2010 Report Share Posted August 15, 2010 Am I crazy if I just want to bid 3NT? Not crazy but i think the hand has too much slam potential that maybe difficult to evaluate after 3NT. 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.