whereagles Posted April 19, 2011 Report Share Posted April 19, 2011 National team trials, matchpoints, expert field. [hv=pc=n&s=saqhak643dak8752c&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=1dp1n3c3h3spp]160|230[/hv] 1♦ = planning to bid hearts twice later.3♣ = "what is it?"; "hmmm... ahem... right. Majors."3♥ = guess I'll keep it low for the moment. So, what now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quiddity Posted April 19, 2011 Report Share Posted April 19, 2011 I think you have to double now to show your high-card strength. edit: Maybe 3NT is a better way to show strength since it also shows the black suit distribution. This hand is really prime though - we could be cold for slam opposite some weak hands even with club waste. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted April 19, 2011 Report Share Posted April 19, 2011 I don't understand this one, did west alert 3♣ as majors? did we bid anything but double? why I didn't open my major is another question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted April 19, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 19, 2011 I think you have to double now to show your high-card strength. Dbl now would be pure penalty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted April 19, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 19, 2011 1. I don't understand this one, did west alert 3♣ as majors? 2. did we bid anything but double? 3. why I didn't open my major is another question. 1. I put the problem as it happened at the table. West did alert and explained it as majors. You can assume it is indeed the majors, otherwise you're protected by the laws and entitled to redress if there is damage to your side. 2. Yes we did. You wanted to dbl 3♣ for penalties? Well, they bid voluntarily to 3♠.. :) You can dbl that now. 3. Because your author, against his principles but totally in conviction, for once decided against using a forcing opener or opening the major. The reasoning is if this doesn't get passed out, he'd be in excellent shape to show this kind of hand. Or so he thought... B-) For instance, if RHO didn't make a nuisance of himself, it might have gone 1♦ 1NT2♥ 2/3x3♥ etc By agreement, this auction would show a 6-5 with 3-4 losers. Just what you have ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quiddity Posted April 19, 2011 Report Share Posted April 19, 2011 edit: sorry, nm.Do you have any relevant agreements about the 3♥ bid after they show the majors? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted April 20, 2011 Report Share Posted April 20, 2011 I would bid 3NT over 3♠ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Posted April 20, 2011 Report Share Posted April 20, 2011 Since we're nicely protected, there seems nothing wrong with a simple 4♦ forcing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyberyeti Posted April 20, 2011 Report Share Posted April 20, 2011 Would the 1N bidder's jump shift have been weak or strong ? I can't help visualising xxx, xx, J, KQ10xxxx opposite. It's a powerful hand, but I'm not sure how much I like the auction at this point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted April 20, 2011 Report Share Posted April 20, 2011 You can assume it is indeed the majors, otherwise you're protected by the laws and entitled to redress if there is damage to your side.Not necessarily. If they can show that systemically it's the majors but RHO has misbid, there is no misinformation and no redress. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwnn Posted April 20, 2011 Report Share Posted April 20, 2011 Not to be racist but in Portugal chances are opps don't have a CC, hence there's little to persuade us about systemic agreements. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted April 20, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 20, 2011 1. Would the 1N bidder's jump shift have been weak or strong ? 2. I can't help visualising xxx, xx, J, KQ10xxxx opposite. 1. Neither. It would have been invitational with both minors. 2. Pard would have bid 1NT with that hand, yes. However, he's the sort of person who might have bid 4♣ over 3♠ with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted April 20, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 20, 2011 As for what 3♣ is, let's cut the story short: the player did have the majors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted April 21, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 Ok, pard had xxxT98J9xAQxx Hoping for a heart short across, I took a shot at 6♦. That and got dbled by LHO, who had ♦QTxx. Couldn't do anything with the hearts, so this went a couple down. But it wasn't all too bad because some pairs bid all the way to SEVEN :) Bit of a trap hand, but in retrospect I think now I'd settle for a quiet 4♦. Pard would probably raise to 5 and I'd have to be very brave and stand ground. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 did you really think about slam when RHO has shown 5+♥ and you are void in partner's suit?. good choice of opening 4♥ doesn't look promising, and probably I'd play more after a raise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kayin801 Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 If 3♣ showed the majors then with my partner I just showed a huge hand with 5+ diamonds and 4+ clubs with my "3♥ cuebid", or some such. Just cause we have a club void doesn't mean that the 3♣ bidder is lying, they could be 5-5-3 or 6-5-3 or 6-4-3 around the table. Along those same lines, bidding 3♥ if it's nat seems crazy to me. Don't ask me what we should have bid. 3NT, hoping for 5♦, 2♥, and 2♠? 4♦ since partner rates to have something in the suit on this auction? No freaking clue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted April 26, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 26, 2011 1. did you really think about slam when RHO has shown 5+♥ and you are void in partner's suit?. 2. good choice of opening 4♥ doesn't look promising, and probably I'd play more after a raise. 1. Yeah, why not? Unless pard has a bucketload of clubs, in which case he could have bid 4♣, he rates to have a heart less and a diamond more, say xxxxxQxxxAxxx This isn't even near the best hand he could have, though it's also true he could have had a considerably worse one. Edit: ran a sim and got these averages 2.28386 spades1.53083 hearts3.19235 diamonds5.99296 clubs7.65959 hcp, of which 5.14062 are in clubs (i.e. wastage) Seems like hoping for 4 diamonds across is optimistic, though heart short is indeed normal. 2. It's very rare for me to bid it like this, but I had the feeling this was the right hand to go against my own principles. Seems like I was right, but then failed to capitalize, ahah :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted April 26, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 26, 2011 If 3♣ showed the majors then with my partner I just showed a huge hand with 5+ diamonds and 4+ clubs with my "3♥ cuebid", or some such. Just cause we have a club void doesn't mean that the 3♣ bidder is lying, they could be 5-5-3 or 6-5-3 or 6-4-3 around the table. Along those same lines, bidding 3♥ if it's nat seems crazy to me. Don't ask me what we should have bid. 3NT, hoping for 5♦, 2♥, and 2♠? 4♦ since partner rates to have something in the suit on this auction? No freaking clue. 3♥ wasn't meant as natural :) The simulation advises caution. That means the better bid would have been.... 3NT. Hamman RULES B-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted April 27, 2011 Report Share Posted April 27, 2011 instead of calculating card averages just calcualte the average number of tricks in diamonds double dummy and see that 11 will probably too many. Partner with heart shortness and diamond support doesn't bid 1NT in a normal system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted April 28, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 28, 2011 Don't have a dbl-dummy simulator lol. Partner with heart shortness and diamond support doesn't bid 1NT in a normal system. huh? From the sim, the average hand in pard is xxxxQxxKQxxxx Pretty clear 1NT bid for me :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted April 28, 2011 Report Share Posted April 28, 2011 and 5♦ goes down on a trump lead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted April 28, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 28, 2011 yeah, but I bet 50-to-1 they'll lead something else B-) 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.