wyman Posted February 8, 2011 Report Share Posted February 8, 2011 [hv=pc=n&s=sqj8hq652d65caj97&d=e&v=0&b=14&a=1np2s(Minor%20Suit%20Stayman)p3nppp]133|200[/hv] Your lead to 3N. What do you choose, and how difficult was your decision (what else were you considering)? edit: 3N denies a 4cm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Posted February 9, 2011 Report Share Posted February 9, 2011 ♥, a mix between passive and active. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gszeszycki Posted February 10, 2011 Report Share Posted February 10, 2011 spade Q The bidding was suspect at best (w/o knowing the opps agreements when using MSS).There is a pretty fair chance Rho has reached with 3n bid. While P may not havea ton of values it is easy for them to have spade length making the spade Q a hugefavorite to not give away contract while having a strong chance to set it. A low heart while more aggressive has a much greater chance of giving declarer atrick in an otherwise unmakeable game and it is very unlikely the 4th heart willbe sufficient to set the contract spade Q = 10low heart = 5pretty much everything else = 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyman Posted February 10, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 10, 2011 spade Q The bidding was suspect at best (w/o knowing the opps agreements when using MSS).There is a pretty fair chance Rho has reached with 3n bid. While P may not havea ton of values it is easy for them to have spade length making the spade Q a hugefavorite to not give away contract while having a strong chance to set it. A low heart while more aggressive has a much greater chance of giving declarer atrick in an otherwise unmakeable game and it is very unlikely the 4th heart willbe sufficient to set the contract spade Q = 10low heart = 5pretty much everything else = 0 I don't see why you think their bidding is suspect when you say you don't know their agreements. Their agreements are 2S = MSS, game forcing3C/3D natural, 4+2N: max with a 5cm3M both minors, low end/high end3N = no 4 card minor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted February 10, 2011 Report Share Posted February 10, 2011 I don't see why you think their bidding is suspect when you say you don't know their agreements. Their agreements are 2S = MSS, game forcing3C/3D natural, 4+2N: max with a 5cm3M both minors, low end/high end3N = no 4 card minor QS ahh so the opp have not told us their full agreements....2s was gf....but we were not told that. many do not play 2s as gf ... in fact a common version is either weak with long d, weak with both minors (5-5) OR SLAM TRY WITH BOTH minors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyman Posted February 10, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 10, 2011 QS ahh so the opp have not told us their full agreements....2s was gf....but we were not told that. many do not play 2s as gf ... in fact a common version is either weak with long d, weak with both minors (5-5) OR SLAM TRY WITH BOTH minors. I play this way but include a balanced invite; never considered it MSS, though, since it doesn't ask opener about a 4cm. Opener's response is:2N with any hand that would decline a balanced invite3m with a hand that would accept an invite, m is his better minor Anyway, sorry for not fully disclosing opps' agreements; I thought standard was that MSS was GF. Anyway, partner and I had strong opinions about the opening lead here. One of us felt it was a clear major-suit lead situation, and the other thought it was a clear minor-suit lead situation. Hence why I posted it. 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.