ATB

[TWO4BRIDGE]

[hv=pc=n&s=sjt752h6dakqt9caj&n=shakqt974d4cqt973&d=w&v=n&b=12&a=1s2s(Hts%20%26%20minor)p2n(ask%20%20minor)p3cppp]266|200|-11.5 IMPs

makes 4H

[/hv]

[mtvesuvius]

[hv=pc=n&s=sjt752h6dakqt9caj&n=shakqt974d4cqt973&d=w&v=n&b=12&a=1s2s(Hts%20%26%20minor)p2n(ask%20%20minor)p3cppp]266|200|-11.5 IMPs

makes 4H

[/hv]

I'd rather be in 7♥ than 3♣.

 

I think both members of this pair bid equally stupidly - They deserve each other.

 

50% North

50% South

100000% whoever taught both players to play bridge.

[semeai]

North has a 4♥ bid over 1♠. Failing that, he can't bid 3♣ if he suspects partner might possibly ever consider passing it, but should try something else (4♥?) over 2NT.

 

Does this pair play 3♣ pass or correct and 2NT show your minor? I can see North thinking that 3♣ can't be passed, since with a hand that would pass 3♣ but move over 3♦, partner could just bid 3♣ pass/correct. However, unless an agreement to this effect is on the books and this is an established partnership, giving partner the opportunity to go wrong here with such a huge hand for hearts seems very wrong.

 

Likely South should seek 3N/5♣ anyway opposite a partner who bid michaels at unfavorable. This nets South a bit of the blame.

[MrAce]

% 100 N for me

[the hog]

Bidding 4H over 1S is very poor. Do you seriously expect partner top move with the AKx of C and not much else? Get real.

 

I don't mind 2S that much, however Nth must bid more than 3C. What are Nth south's agreements here? Would 4C be forcing? Why not bid 4H over 2NT, or perhaps 3S over 2NT? I agree, I would also rather be in 7H than 3C. I would be disappointed if my pd and I did not reach 6H.

South's pass of 3C is also wimpy.

[Lurpoa]

% 100 N for me

 

 

 

 

♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥

 

 

 

WHY ?

[hotShot]

There are not enough % available to assign blame.

Both 3♣ by North and pass on 3♣ by South are .... (searching for a political correct word) .... poor.

[andy_h]

What do you call AKQ109xx? Trumps.

[whereagles]

3♣ is a feeble bid. A 4♥ rebid is far more adequate. Not that you'd reach slam after that, but at least game you can't miss anymore :)

[Hanoi5]

North.

[billw55]

With such disparity in suits, I definitely think north should bid 2♥ over 1♠, and reserve the option to introduce clubs later. So blame mostly for north.

 

That said south, gets a small share for wimpiness.

[ArtK78]

With such disparity in suits, I definitely think north should bid 2♥ over 1♠, and reserve the option to introduce clubs later. So blame mostly for north.

 

That said south, gets a small share for wimpiness.

Speaking of wimpiness, that is how I would describe a 2♥ bid over 1♠.

 

I would insist on game with the North hand. Double followed by 4♥ is reasonable. North has a likely 9 playing tricks in hearts.

 

One can construct hands where it is right to play in clubs and not hearts. But it is probably not worth looking for them.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

As it was.... 13 tricks can be had in Hts or even Diam .

Only ONE pair ( of 16 ) bid slam... and that was 6D :

( 1S ) - DBL - ( p ) - 3NT

( p ) - 4C! - ( p ) - 6D ... where 4C! was alerted ( not sure, but I think it was Gerber ).

 

The rest ( except for the fatefull 3C partial ) were in a Ht game, not slam ( cold for 13 tricks ) -- after a 1S or 2S opening by West.

Seven of the North's overcalled 4H.

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sjt752h6dakqt9caj&w=sak8643hjd6532ck4&n=shakqt974d4cqt973&e=sq9h8532dj87c8652]399|300[/hv]

[aguahombre]

At these colors, with a N/S pair who have some standards about their 4H overcalls, slam might be reached after 4H. It is not hard for South to picture spade shortness and a solid heart suit.

[jmcw]

Agree with MrAce.

 

North has ♥ and more ♥. Bid 4♥

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

North has a solid 7 card suit? A mediocrite 5 card suit? And sells his hand as?

 

Sry is this a trick question?

 

If it comes to South - He has 15HCP, his p makes red vs. green two level overcall,

and he just asks for prference? He should ask North, what is the dead min for a

2NT call in this position, ... most would simply raise 2NT to 3NT, sometimes it

makes.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[olegru]

North‘s bidding definitely deserve additional call … to friendly psychiatrist.

[Lurpoa]

North.

 

 

 

 

♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥

 

 

 

Why ?

 

 

[billw55]

Speaking of wimpiness, that is how I would describe a 2♥ bid over 1♠.

 

I would insist on game with the North hand. Double followed by 4♥ is reasonable. North has a likely 9 playing tricks in hearts.

 

One can construct hands where it is right to play in clubs and not hearts. But it is probably not worth looking for them.

Yes, dbl followed by hearts is also an option. Some would expect more high card strength for such a bid; others wouldn't. The main thing I was trying to say was that north should start by introducing hearts alone, not with a two-suited call.

[MrAce]

WHY ?

 

There is not much cure for a blind eye but letme try..

|

|

|

\ /

.

 

 

I'd rather be in 7♥ than 3♣.

 

What do you call AKQ109xx? Trumps.

 

3♣ is a feeble bid. A 4♥ rebid is far more adequate. Not that you'd reach slam after that, but at least game you can't miss anymore :)

 

North‘s bidding definitely deserve additional call … to friendly psychiatrist.

 

With such disparity in suits, I definitely think north should bid 2♥ over 1♠, and reserve the option to introduce clubs later.

 

 

Also;

 

- Eventhough it looks like one, 7M + 5 minor should not be treated as 2 suiter. Who on earth wants his pd to prefer a Q high 5 card suit when pd is void in ♥ ? U wanna play to a 5-2 or 5-3 fit when pd is void or stiff in ♥ suit ?

 

-Most of the famous bridge conventions are invented to find a major fit, yet here North, holding it in his own hand, acts as if he needs a preference from pd to decide which suit to set as trumps !

 

-North's hand plays 4♥ vs pd's ♣J and nothing else.

 

-Yes south was wimpy with this hand, but who cares ? After all they would be playing the same contract (if opps let them) when South holding JT9xx x QJxxx Jx and 4♥ still great contract and noone would even mention south's role in this disaster.

[Lurpoa]

There is not much cure for a blind eye but letme try..

|

|

|

\ /

.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Also;

 

- Eventhough it looks like one, 7M + 5 minor should not be treated as 2 suiter. Who on earth wants his pd to prefer a Q high 5 card suit when pd is void in ♥ ? U wanna play to a 5-2 or 5-3 fit when pd is void or stiff in ♥ suit ?

 

-Most of the famous bridge conventions are invented to find a major fit, yet here North, holding it in his own hand, acts as if he needs a preference from pd to decide which suit to set as trumps !

 

-North's hand plays 4♥ vs pd's ♣J and nothing else.

 

-Yes south was wimpy with this hand, but who cares ? After all they would be playing the sane contract (if opps let them) when South holding JT9xx x QJxxx Jx and 4♥ still great contract and noone would even mention south's role in this disaster.

 

 

 

 

 

♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥

 

 

 

Hi, yes.

 

Nice to hear your reasoning. Thanks, seems very plausible what you are saying.

 

Just, please.... try to use a little friendlier words: the world will be the better by it.

[mikeh]

Altho I dislike S's action, North deserves the equivalent of 100% of the blame all by himself.

 

But I disagree with those who criticize his initial action. Yes, there are reasonable alternatives, I suppose, but I have no issue at all with Michaels, provided that he follows through. Thus, over any minimal advance, whether 2N or 3m, he bids 4♥. Surely this shows 6/7 good hearts and a 5/6 card minor...a hand worth committing to game but with wild shape (which is why no double).

 

While nothing is perfect, we do know that Michaels will not be passed (ok, I once saw it passed....spades were 5=0=0=8 and partner held QJ9xxxxx and nothing else), and, should partner have values, we will usually be able to convey a fairly accurate picture of our hand, unless we do something egregious, such as show our minor first B-)

[MrAce]

Altho I dislike S's action, North deserves the equivalent of 100% of the blame all by himself.

 

But I disagree with those who criticize his initial action. Yes, there are reasonable alternatives, I suppose, but I have no issue at all with Michaels, provided that he follows through. Thus, over any minimal advance, whether 2N or 3m, he bids 4♥. Surely this shows 6/7 good hearts and a 5/6 card minor...a hand worth committing to game but with wild shape (which is why no double).

 

While nothing is perfect, we do know that Michaels will not be passed (ok, I once saw it passed....spades were 5=0=0=8 and partner held QJ9xxxxx and nothing else), and, should partner have values, we will usually be able to convey a fairly accurate picture of our hand, unless we do something egregious, such as show our minor first B-)

 

I agree and i have no objection whatsoever about how one chooses to start the auction, as long as he/she does not stop b4 4♥, and bids in a way that pd converts to ♣ ONLY when he has 4 or more ♣ and ♥ shortness. I think it is awful if we bid in a way that leads pd converting 4♥ to 5♣ when holding void and Jxx.

[Lurpoa]

North.

 

 

♥♥♥♥♥♥

 

♥♥ WHY ? ♥♥

 

♥♥♥♥♥♥

[Free]

♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥

 

 

 

Hi, yes.

 

Nice to hear your reasoning. Thanks, seems very plausible what you are saying.

 

Just, please.... try to use a little friendlier words fewer ♥ symbols: the world will be the better by it.

FYP