mtvesuvius Posted January 24, 2011 Report Share Posted January 24, 2011 [hv=pc=n&s=sk6hj764dakt643c9&d=e&v=b&b=10&a=p1d2h2sp3d3h(lol)4hp]133|200|Partner is a (real) expert... What's your call here?[/hv] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inquiry Posted January 24, 2011 Report Share Posted January 24, 2011 4♠ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yogeshdg Posted January 24, 2011 Report Share Posted January 24, 2011 4♠Ditto :) Inquiry please change your profile to world class. This is the 3rd time I have seen you give a good answer. By the way what are your thoughts on 3♠ instead of 3♦ inquiry? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrAce Posted January 24, 2011 Report Share Posted January 24, 2011 4♠ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P_Marlowe Posted January 24, 2011 Report Share Posted January 24, 2011 Hi, pass is out, so 4S is the weakes bid we have av., besides 5D, but we have already shown a (reasonable) 6 card suit. The question is, if we have enough to be make a stronger bid, e.g. 5S. I am not sure, I would have given it a lot of though on the table, but5S is certainly a reaonsble call. With kind regardsMarlowe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mfa1010 Posted January 24, 2011 Report Share Posted January 24, 2011 Clearly a different style than what I'm used to, since I find 4♠ out of the question.4♥ is for me a strong support of diamonds (high level cuebids are almost always 'I like your suit' - choice of games hands could double), and since 3♦ was NF, I do indeed have a magical hand. I would bid 4NT RCK for diamonds. 4♠ would be a suggestion to play with a doubleton, but I don't want to play 4♠ - I want to play a diamond slam. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the_dude Posted January 24, 2011 Report Share Posted January 24, 2011 Clearly a different style than what I'm used to, since I find 4♠ out of the question.4♥ is for me a strong support of diamonds (high level cuebids are almost always 'I like your suit' - choice of games hands could double), and since 3♦ was NF, I do indeed have a magical hand. I would bid 4NT RCK for diamonds. 4♠ would be a suggestion to play with a doubleton, but I don't want to play 4♠ - I want to play a diamond slam. I thought 4♠ was a cue bid on the way to a D slam, I did not take it as choice of games as he could have doubled with a more ambiguous hand. 4NT is possible here too but it worries me because if partner is void in Hearts then it might be tough to untangle whether we have the tricks for 7. Telling partner that we have the K of spades (and by inference agreeing on a Diamond slam) could be vital info for him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted January 24, 2011 Report Share Posted January 24, 2011 If I'm sure 4♥ shows diamond fit, 4NT (got an excellent hand for slam). If I'm not that sure, then 4♠. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtvesuvius Posted January 24, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 24, 2011 We hadn't discussed the meaning of 4♥, but I think it should be a somewhat ambiguous slam try, assumed to be for diamonds, however partner could also have a very strong hand with spades. I'm not really sure what's standard here, I was playing with a partner who I hadn't played with before, so we didn't have any detailed (meta)-agreements. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted January 24, 2011 Report Share Posted January 24, 2011 I can't see why 4♥ can't be COG. Would 3♠ really be forcing? Would 4♦? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olien Posted January 24, 2011 Report Share Posted January 24, 2011 I have a GREAT hand for slam, Kx of ♠, nothing wasted in ♥, and a ♣ control. However, I agree that 4♥ shows atleast some degree of ♦ support, so I'll also show my ♠ honour on the way. If partner has a good (3+) ♦ fit, he can bid over 4♠ and then I can drive to slam. This hand is a good advertisement for playing 3♠ over 2♥ as a semi-solid or better 6+ suit and game forcing values. This way 4♥ would not be ambiguous as to being single suited or with support. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted January 24, 2011 Report Share Posted January 24, 2011 4♠ sounds to me like a sing off, I'd rather bid 5♣ now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ceeb Posted January 24, 2011 Report Share Posted January 24, 2011 4♠. I sympathize with the worry that this might undercook for ♠ purposes, but other than that I don't understand the reservations. With a million hands like AQJxx,xx,xxx,AQJ, what choice has partner but to make (practically -- except for 4♣) the only forcing bid? If slam-going with diamonds, partner will be happy to hear of the double fit and will not pass. Even if partner might pass 4♠ on a few hands where 6♦ is best it is hard to imagine that failure to indicate the ♠ feature will lead to more accurate slam judgment on average over those marginal deals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karlson Posted January 24, 2011 Report Share Posted January 24, 2011 With a million hands like AQJxx,xx,xxx,AQJ, what choice has partner but to make (practically -- except for 4♣) the only forcing bid? Double? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kayin801 Posted January 24, 2011 Report Share Posted January 24, 2011 I would bid 4♠ to show the double "fit" and wait for partner to clarify his hand. Couldn't partner have AQJ10xxx, Ax, Q, xxx or Axxxx, x, QJxx, AKx at this point? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mfa1010 Posted January 24, 2011 Report Share Posted January 24, 2011 I can't see why 4♥ can't be COG. Would 3♠ really be forcing? Would 4♦?No, 3♠ and 4♦ would not be forcing. If 4♦ would be forcing, then there would be little need for 4♥ as a good diamond raise. Make your choice. I think COG tends to be inferior. It comes up less frequently and is less valuable. For partner and me a cuebid such as this one is always a good raise in partner's suit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted January 26, 2011 Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 Agree with MFA: With a choice of games partner can double, and 4S suggests playing there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ceeb Posted January 26, 2011 Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 Agree with MFA: With a choice of games partner can double, ...What does partner do to punish West -- who incidentally is begging for trouble -- for being out of line? (I'm presuming that your agreement with MFA extends to agreeing that pass would not be forcing.) Partner is unlimited and could have a huge hand with a slew of hearts. Does West have a license to steal? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted January 26, 2011 Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 I probably play takeout doubles in many situations where you play penalty doubles. This will cause me to miss an occasional big penalty in exchange for greater flexibility and clarity on a (far?) larger number of hands. It mostly is a matter of partnership agreement. I don't find your simplistic Does West have a license to steal? very convincing, are you related to pooltuna? The question of how to use a bid or double optimally often does not have simple answer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrAce Posted January 26, 2011 Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 I can't see why 4♥ can't be COG. Would 3♠ really be forcing? Would 4♦? Does it matter ? Whether COG or big hand with ♠ or big hand with ♦, our response is 4♠ :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdano Posted January 26, 2011 Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 What does partner do to punish West -- who incidentally is begging for trouble -- for being out of line? (I'm presuming that your agreement with MFA extends to agreeing that pass would not be forcing.) Partner is unlimited and could have a huge hand with a slew of hearts. Does West have a license to steal?West is already getting punished. He gave partner a chance to define his hand very well by bidding 2♠, then doubling. Meanwhile, opener also described his hand much better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ceeb Posted January 26, 2011 Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 I probably play takeout doubles in many situations where you play penalty doubles. This will cause me to miss an occasional big penalty in exchange for greater flexibility and clarity on a (far?) larger number of hands. It mostly is a matter of partnership agreement.[/Quote]I realize that thoughtful modern pairs have reasonably well-defined rules for when a double is takeout, and that a side-effect of having unambiguous and reasonably simple rules is that a few (hopefully obscure) situations will slip through the cracks. That's life. So I accept that even if we agreed 100% that this particular double should ideally be penalty, it wouldn't follow that our shared opinion would make it penalty at the table or even that you should necessarily make your double-rules more complicated in order to cater to this situation in the future. But it does seem odd to me. If this double by an unlimited hand when a pass wouldn't be forcing, over a rebid by an unsupported overcaller/preemptor, isn't penalty, what is? I don't find your simplistic Does West have a license to steal? very convincing, are you related to pooltuna?I debated whether I was engaging in hyperbole when I was composing but after reflection I decided the words are justified. I grant that West hasn't a license to preempt and then rebid on ♥Jxxx. But what West apparently can do, having gotten away with 2♥ on whatever and detecting that LHO has a powerful hand, is to rebid the ♥ with impunity. My use of "license to steal" is comparable to the typical bridge use of the phrase. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted January 26, 2011 Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 West's 3♥ bid hasn't stolen anything from us: we have all of the space that we would have had if he had passed. We could, if we chose to, play a double as any hand that would have cue-bid 3♥, and 4♥ as a splinter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted January 26, 2011 Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 I've come around to the idea that 4♥ isn't a COG. Partner should double 3♥ with many flexible hands that are unsure about strain. So, at a (second) look, partner has spades or diamonds, but not both. I'm also wondering about 4♣, but this seems to be a search for strain since we are in a stressed auction. Yet, hands that are looking for clubs can double. What about 4♣ as a flag for diamonds and 4♥ a flag for spades? I am now really bullish on slam. I can't tell how useful my diamonds are, but its easy to see how this is a magical minimum. 5♠ should look for the heart card. That's my call. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ceeb Posted January 27, 2011 Report Share Posted January 27, 2011 What does partner do to punish West -- who incidentally is begging for trouble -- for being out of line?West is already getting punished. He gave partner a chance to define his hand very well by bidding 2♠, then doubling. Meanwhile, opener also described his hand much better.I'll try to refine my blood lust. 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.