VM1973 Posted August 6, 2011 Report Share Posted August 6, 2011 You hold: ♠Jxx♥x♦xx♣AKQxxxx IMPs. The auction goes: 1♣-Pass-1♠-Pass?? [hv=lin=pn|simmons39,alexa_dea,mrrichard,VM1973|st||md|4S29QH29TJKD23QC5J,S8TKAH347D579TJC2,S356H56QAD8KAC89T,|rh||ah|Board 2|sv|n|mb|1C|mb|p|mb|1S|mb|p|mb|3C|mb|p|mb|3D|mb|p|mb|3S|mb|p|mb|p|mb|p|pg||pc|DA|pc|D4|pc|D2|pc|D5|pg||pc|DK|pc|D6|pc|D3|pc|D7|pg||pc|HA|pc|H8|pc|H9|pc|H3|pg||pc|D8|pc|SJ|pc|DQ|pc|D9|pg||pc|CA|pc|C5|pc|C2|pc|C8|pg||pc|CK|pc|CJ|pc|H4|pc|C9|pg||pc|CQ|pc|H2|pc|H7|pc|CT|pg||pc|S4|pc|S2|pc|ST|pc|S3|pg||pc|SA|pc|S5|pc|S7|pc|S9|pg||pc|SK|pc|S6|pc|C3|pc|SQ|pg||pc|DT|pc|H5|pc|C4|pc|HT|pg||pc|DJ|pc|H6|pc|C6|pc|HJ|pg||pc|S8|pc|HQ|pc|C7|pc|HK|pg||]400|300[/hv] 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMorris Posted August 6, 2011 Report Share Posted August 6, 2011 2 ♣ for me. I guess the only alternative is 2 ♠ but you might get cut off from the clubs playing in spades. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BunnyGo Posted August 6, 2011 Report Share Posted August 6, 2011 I also bid 2♣. I strongly disagree with the 3♣ bid. I think that while the suit texture is correct for the bid, the hand is better described by opening 3♣ or rebidding 2♣. While the 3♣ rebid is primarily based on suit quality, it does need some strength in general to back it up--a shapely 10 count doesn't do it for me. Edit: relooking at the hand, of course one would open 3NT instead of 3♣. I prefer it to 1♣. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted August 6, 2011 Report Share Posted August 6, 2011 2c wtp? 6c and around 10-15 if good 13+ then very ofen with a stiff or void, no 1nt opening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daveharty Posted August 6, 2011 Report Share Posted August 6, 2011 Given that you didn't open 3NT, then I think 2C is better than 2S. What's the old saw about "What do you call a seven-card suit?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BunnyGo Posted August 6, 2011 Report Share Posted August 6, 2011 Given that you didn't open 3NT, then I think 2C is better than 2S. What's the old saw about "What do you call a seven-card suit?" agreed, but if you check the spoiler, he rebid 3♣. I think he's asking about our opinion of that bid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyberyeti Posted August 6, 2011 Report Share Posted August 6, 2011 My auction went 3N-P-4♣ end and would never consider anything else. You've potentially got a good MP score off this but not one I'd want at IMPS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nige1 Posted August 7, 2011 Report Share Posted August 7, 2011 You hold: ♠IMPs Jxx ♥ x ♦ xx ♣ AKQxxxx The auction goes:1♣-Pass-1♠-Pass?? IMO 2♣ = 10. 2♠ = 8, 3♣ = 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wank Posted August 7, 2011 Report Share Posted August 7, 2011 your auction is off the chart. you have nowhere near enough for 3♣, despite the 3 card spade fit. then your partner decided to pass a forcing bid at the end. 2 spades immediately would be ridiculous too btw. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted August 7, 2011 Report Share Posted August 7, 2011 These are some of the odder "ATB" problems I've seen around here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLOGIC Posted August 7, 2011 Report Share Posted August 7, 2011 IMO 2♣ = 10. 2♠ = 8, 3♣ = 5 2S, are you kidding me? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ahydra Posted August 7, 2011 Report Share Posted August 7, 2011 Has to be 2C... but I would have opened 3NT. ahydra 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLOGIC Posted August 7, 2011 Report Share Posted August 7, 2011 Opening 3N seems like a completely random bid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyberyeti Posted August 7, 2011 Report Share Posted August 7, 2011 Opening 3N seems like a completely random bidSo half the world is wrong in playing gambling 3N, or you require the J to consider it a solid suit ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daveharty Posted August 7, 2011 Report Share Posted August 7, 2011 agreed, but if you check the spoiler, he rebid 3♣. I think he's asking about our opinion of that bid.Ah...I didn't read the spoiler. I think the hand is an ace or king short of 3C despite the (possible) spade fit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nige1 Posted August 7, 2011 Report Share Posted August 7, 2011 IMO 2♣ = 10. 2♠ = 8, 3♣ = 5 2S, are you kidding me? No 2♣ is my first choice but 2♠ is more pre-emptive and 4♠ has a reasonable chance of ten tricks, when partner holds, for example♠ AKQxx ♥ xxxx ♦ xx ♣ xx or ♠ AQTxx ♥ Qxx ♦ xx ♣ xxx or...[Enough specially selected hands: Ed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLOGIC Posted August 7, 2011 Report Share Posted August 7, 2011 No 2♣ is my first choice but 2♠ is more pre-emptive and 4♠ has a reasonable chance of ten tricks, when partner holds, for example♠ AKQxx ♥ xxxx ♦ xx ♣ xx or ♠ AQTxx ♥ Qxx ♦ xx ♣ xxx or...[Enough specially selected hands: Ed] These hands are pretty much impossible to me since the opponents have both passed and seem to be cold for game with a big double fit and more than half the deck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nige1 Posted August 7, 2011 Report Share Posted August 7, 2011 These hands are pretty much impossible to me since the opponents have both passed and seem to be cold for game with a big double fit and more than half the deck. It rather depends on whether team-mates happily accept "opponent's timidity" as a valid excuse when you miss a reasonable 4♠. Also, defending 4♥ is no cinch but you don't mind taking your chances in defence at the five level. Please remember that my role here is Devil's Advocate (I would bid 2♣ not 2♠). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Posted August 8, 2011 Report Share Posted August 8, 2011 The only reason for me to raise on a 3 card suit if every other 'normal' rebid has some flaw (rebidding 5 card suit or poor 6 card suit, rebidding 1NT with a small doubleton or singleton,...). Here I don't see anything wrong with 2♣ because we have a good 6+ card suit, so I wouldn't raise ♠s with this hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VM1973 Posted August 8, 2011 Author Report Share Posted August 8, 2011 Assuming your partner has 5 spades then the hand contains only 6 losers. I did seriously consider bidding 2♠. With no advance discussion I didn't want to try a gambling 3NT. After partner bid 3♦ I felt certain that we had an 8+ card spade fit, but that turned out not to be the case. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted August 8, 2011 Report Share Posted August 8, 2011 Opening 3N seems like a completely random bidIsn't that the point of the convention? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted August 10, 2011 Report Share Posted August 10, 2011 Opening 3N seems like a completely random bid Just like any other preempt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nige1 Posted August 11, 2011 Report Share Posted August 11, 2011 Opening 3N seems like a completely random bid Agreeing, I think:In principle, the gambling 3N opener is flawed, because when 3N is the right contract, the convention usually wrong-sides it.IMO, in first two seats, as here, a gambling 3N should be disciplined, so responder can make informed decisions. The normal conventional understanding precludes possession of two aces. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VM1973 Posted August 11, 2011 Author Report Share Posted August 11, 2011 Agreeing, I think:In principle, the gambling 3N opener is flawed, because when 3N is the right contract, the convention usually wrong-sides it.IMO, in first two seats, as here, a gambling 3N should be disciplined, so responder can make informed decisions. The normal conventional understanding precludes possession of two aces.I agree that the gambling 3NT usually wrongsides the contract, which was why there was a move afoot to make 3♣ solid and 3NT broken but as far as I know the technical details never got worked out to anyone's satisfaction. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted August 12, 2011 Report Share Posted August 12, 2011 I veemently dispute the claim that gambling 3NT often wrong-sides the contract. I've been playing that convention for the last 15 years or so and I've yet to see a case where wrong-siding was the difference between making and failing. I've seen the 7-card suit not breaking like 2 or 3 times (Jxxx on an opponent), but never wrong-siding. Besides, those who criticise the gambling 3NT fail to see its main advantage: a simple bid that shows one's hand to 99% accuracy while remaining at a reasonably safe level. Wrong-siding is a tertiary worry and putting it as first priority is a technical mistake. 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.