rduran1216 Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 [hv=pc=n&s=shkj9873d3cakq743&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1h1sd2d]133|200[/hv] Now what? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cascade Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 3♣ I need more information and the way to get that is to keep the bidding low. There is only a very small risk that this will end the auction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLOGIC Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 4C and play some bridge! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 6♣ has some merit, we don't have a way to discover what partner has, but chaces are he has 1 of the 2 missing aces, or ♠A and they mislead. Bidding slowly doesn't really seem to help our side but it will help theirs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 4♣ seems like an underbid.... but 4♠ is likely to give pard an headache. I'll just go with a practical 5♣, willing to give up on slam. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeh Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 3♣ is too little 5♣ too much, tho not in the sense of getting us too high...more in the sense of consuming all of our bidding space A cuebid of anything is too confusing, and creates problems on the next round when neither of us will know what the other meant. 4♣ seems just right. While my view is that this is forcing, I really don't care too much.....if partner thinks it is merely highky encouraging, and passes, we haven't missed game yet. Jxx xx KQxx Jxxx needs some luck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 That's just about the lousiest hand pard can have, mike :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 Since 4♣ is forcing, I fail to see how it is an underbid. I don't know if I can reach slam with certainty, or how I can avoid a slam when its wrong, but this seems like a good start. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtK78 Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 4♣ is descriptive and forcing, so I don't see how it can be the wrong choice, whether it turns out to be the winning call or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rduran1216 Posted January 6, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 6, 2011 i wasnt sure if any club bid i could make was forcing so i decided to bid 3H and follow with a club bid, which gave my p the impression i was willing to play in 6H opposite a stiff. I'm not sure absent an agreement that 4C is forcing since p has bid clubs already. I think 6C in this spot has alot of merit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wank Posted January 6, 2011 Report Share Posted January 6, 2011 i wasnt sure if any club bid i could make was forcing so i decided to bid 3H and follow with a club bid, which gave my p the impression i was willing to play in 6H opposite a stiff. I'm not sure absent an agreement that 4C is forcing since p has bid clubs already. I think 6C in this spot has alot of merit. pmsl. you couldn't think of any forcing club bids so you made a non-forcing heart bid? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gszeszycki Posted January 6, 2011 Report Share Posted January 6, 2011 this hand has become so powerful any number of clubs will fail to do it justice. I would like my chances on 6c if p had as little as xxx Ax xxxx xxxx and p is better than that wejust dont know where their power is. Another problem with bidding clubs is we are looking at AKQ which means p is not so getting them to cooperate with slam tries will bedifficult at best. I suggest we take the slow route and begin by bidding a mere 2s and see where that leads us. The key here is do not waste precious bidding space.Who knows p might even have a heart fit they want to show us:)) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rduran1216 Posted January 6, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 6, 2011 pmsl. you couldn't think of any forcing club bids so you made a non-forcing heart bid? 3H seemed more forcing than 4C in this auction it seems like this should follow the same logic as 1D 1H 3H No 3H isn't forcing, its just a strong holding inviting to game. Seems like any denomiation of clubs is giving partner info and suggesting the proper level. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Posted January 6, 2011 Report Share Posted January 6, 2011 4♣ is pretty much the strongest bid we have, so wtp? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nige1 Posted January 6, 2011 Report Share Posted January 6, 2011 [hv=pc=n&s=shkj9873d3cakq743&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1h1sd2d]133|200| Now what?[/hv] IMO 4♣ = 10, 3♦ = 9, 2♠ = 8, 3♠ = 7, 6♣ = 6, 3♣ = 5. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted January 6, 2011 Report Share Posted January 6, 2011 I don't see why 4♣ should be forcing. Partner's double more or less promises 4-4 in the minors, so I think any number of clubs is a limit bid, in the same way that 1♦ (1♠) dbl (pass) 3♥ is a limit bid. I have an easy way to make a forcing bid in clubs and show my hand at the same time - 3♠. That's obviously a splinter for clubs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kayin801 Posted January 6, 2011 Report Share Posted January 6, 2011 2♠ followed by 4♣ or 5♣, whichever is available. I'm trying to envision what hands the opponents would have to jump to 5♦ before we get another turn and I don't think the likelihood is high. More often they'll get to 4♠. If I were confident that 3♠ were a club splinter like gnasher said I would bid that but I have woefully underdiscussed this auction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeh Posted January 6, 2011 Report Share Posted January 6, 2011 Does anyone play any version of good/bad or bad/good 2N here? If so, that would assist, since we would now have 3 ways to show (or imply) clubs below game, in addition to what I respectfully say is the not-so-obvious splinter of 3♠. It may be obvious to Andy but the fact that it garnered so little support here suggests that it is far from obvious to the majority of players. Which makes it a dangerous choice. What would we do with x AKQ10xxx Ax Kxx, assuming we opened 1♥? I'm not saying I'd bid 3♠, but whether I ended up doing so or not, I suspect 3♠ would garner at least some support in a bidding contest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted January 6, 2011 Report Share Posted January 6, 2011 Does anyone play any version of good/bad or bad/good 2N here? I do. The 2NT here would be either a max or min (med hands bid directly), so wouldn't be of much use because it's rather nebulous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted January 6, 2011 Report Share Posted January 6, 2011 Does anyone play any version of good/bad or bad/good 2N here? If so, that would assist, since we would now have 3 ways to show (or imply) clubs below game, in addition to what I respectfully say is the not-so-obvious splinter of 3♠. It may be obvious to Andy but the fact that it garnered so little support here suggests that it is far from obvious to the majority of players. Which makes it a dangerous choice. What would we do with x AKQ10xxx Ax Kxx, assuming we opened 1♥? I'm not saying I'd bid 3♠, but whether I ended up doing so or not, I suspect 3♠ would garner at least some support in a bidding contest. Yep - which is why 4♣ is forcing. There's no need for a minimum 3♣, a good 3♣ call and a dynamite hand with clubs, that just....isn't....quite...forcing either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted January 6, 2011 Report Share Posted January 6, 2011 Does anyone play any version of good/bad or bad/good 2N hereYep - which is why 4♣ is forcing.So if you weren't playing Good-Bad 2NT, 4♣ would be non-forcing? I agree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrAce Posted January 7, 2011 Report Share Posted January 7, 2011 Does anyone play any version of good/bad or bad/good 2N here? With good-bad 2 NT, 4♣ is forcing. It may be obvious to Andy but the fact that it garnered so little support here suggests that it is far from obvious to the majority of players. Which makes it a dangerous choice. Same goes for 4♣ As far as i searched, 4 ♣ is far from being obvious forcing for a lot of players (without agreement). In fact for majority it is not. Don't get me wrong, the more i think about it, the more i am convincing myself that better to play it forcing. But w/o agreement, it is not obvious for a lot of people therefore as dangerous as Andy's bid, if not more. Since noone will pass his bid but some will pass 4♣. Although at the end, if u both have an accident, u will probably leave the accident scene with less injuries :) And sometimes even if pd passes, u can still be given another chance by opponents. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted January 7, 2011 Report Share Posted January 7, 2011 If so, that would assist, since we would now have 3 ways to show (or imply) clubs below game, in addition to what I respectfully say is the not-so-obvious splinter of 3♠. It may be obvious to Andy but the fact that it garnered so little support here suggests that it is far from obvious to the majority of players. Which makes it a dangerous choice. What would we do with x AKQ10xxx Ax Kxx, assuming we opened 1♥? I'm not saying I'd bid 3♠, but whether I ended up doing so or not, I suspect 3♠ would garner at least some support in a bidding contest.Sometimes it requires a little thought to work out that something is obvious. 3♠ certainly shows shortage, unless you have an explicit agreement that a jump in an opponent's suit means something else. Usually a splinter shows support for your partner's suit, rather than agreeing your own suit. Most people play self-agreeing splinters only when partner hasn't shown a suit, typically when he has bid notrumps. There is good reason for that - if all partner has done is to show his own suit, I dont have any particular reason to expect support, so it's rare that I can say for certain "My suit is trumps". However, I will often have four-card support for partner's suit, so I will often be able to say "Your suit is trumps." In this sequence responder has shown two suits. That certainly makes it less likely that I could set my own suit as trumps, and it doesn't make it any less likely that I have support for one of his suits. If I had primary diamonds, I would double 2♦ to expose the psyche. Therefore 3♠ agrees clubs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdano Posted January 7, 2011 Report Share Posted January 7, 2011 What I would really like to bid is 4S=exclusion keycard. Obviously I wouldn't risk this unless we had discussed that double jumps to the 4-level can be exclusion for a minor suit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrAce Posted January 7, 2011 Report Share Posted January 7, 2011 @ Gnasher; I agree with ya on the splinter and that it needs to be on responder's suit w/o agreement otherwise. What would u suggest use of 2♠, 3♦, 3♠ (u already said), 4♦/♠ cues here ? After this topic i started to think on the issue, since me and my pd dont have detailed agreement on this. How about being able to cue or splinter by also telling pd if we are doing this with fit or self sufficient trump of ourself ? For example somethign like "unusual over unusual" treatment. It wont be able to show stiff but shape and strong hands (perhaps stiff can be shown later ?) In this example 3♠ showing strong ♥ suit and a shortness somewhere in opponents suit, 3♦ or 4♦ showing ♣ fit and a hand with shape....not able to show stiff+ fit at same time but has some merits when opener has self sufficient or close suit and big hand. What do u think ? 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.