bluecalm Posted April 5, 2012 Report Share Posted April 5, 2012 [hv=pc=n&n=shakqj6dq4cqjt953&d=e&v=e&b=6&a=pp1d2np3cp]133|200[/hv] Casual partnership. No special agreements.Your bid ? EDIT: it's matchpoints Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluecalm Posted April 5, 2012 Author Report Share Posted April 5, 2012 Btw I need that as a panel for UI problem so please vote even if you are not interested in discussing this position :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
broze Posted April 5, 2012 Report Share Posted April 5, 2012 4♠ EDIT: Oops, missed the fact that it was MPs. In this case I would make a 3NT probe with 3♥ or 3♦. I don't care much for 4♣ - it seems to me that if you're going to bid 4 you may as well bid 5. Though perhaps that's still my IMP brain talking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeh Posted April 5, 2012 Report Share Posted April 5, 2012 4♣ At this heat, we could have a lot fewer values. Qxxxx xx Kxx Kxx is enough for game, and why would he bid more than 3♣ with that (or with quite a bit more than that)? The fact that it is mps militates slightly in favour of passing, but the game bonus helps your mp score as well :P Admittedly, this general try won't help him make the right decision all the time, but we have too much hope for game to pass and no other descriptive call available. Forcing to game is just too much of a gamble. Btw, I realize that in the UI situation, worrying about the choice of 2N is meaningless, but I prefer 2♣, intending to balance with 4N if they reach 4♠. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted April 5, 2012 Report Share Posted April 5, 2012 Some gentle move is warranted. 4♣ looks right and I think 3♥ could get us to a real nice 3N. 4♠ is way too much with this. If I had two aces as partner I'd be thinking about 7, yet 6 probably won't make. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtK78 Posted April 5, 2012 Report Share Posted April 5, 2012 Too much to pass, too little to force to game. 4♣ seems just right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted April 5, 2012 Report Share Posted April 5, 2012 Agree with Mikeh. Gotta bid again after perpetrating 2NT at these colors. A heart bid might be suggested by UI/MI about the nature of 2NT, so any of the other poll options---though not advisable, seem lawful. OTOH, if the UI was tempo, passing is not logical. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluecalm Posted April 5, 2012 Author Report Share Posted April 5, 2012 The problem is rather untypical.I was W and I asked about 2NT (it was alerted) when it was my turn. It was explained as "club preempt". I passed and 2NT bidder bid 3H which was raised to 4. I called TD because I felt 4H was difficult to reach without UI. TD basically ignored me :)Full hand: http://www.pzbs.pl/wyniki/turnieje/2012/gpp/03lodz/ldgppp006.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeh Posted April 5, 2012 Report Share Posted April 5, 2012 The problem is rather untypical.I was W and I asked about 2NT (it was alerted) when it was my turn. It was explained as "club preempt". I passed and 2NT bidder bid 3H which was raised to 4. I called TD because I felt 4H was difficult to reach without UI. TD basically ignored me :)Full hand: http://www.pzbs.pl/wyniki/turnieje/2012/gpp/03lodz/ldgppp006.htmlThe first important question, imo, was whether the alert was correct. If not...if the partnership agreement was that 2N was unusual, then I think the director was wrong. If, however, the alert and explanation were correct, then we get into whether N had planned his action (2N was never going to be passed, and now 3♥ seems sort of self-explanatory, doesn't it?) or whether he had forgotten the agreement and had been 'alerted' to his error by the alert Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyberyeti Posted April 5, 2012 Report Share Posted April 5, 2012 I'd bid 3♥ normally, but not with the UI situation as there are LAs. Why ? The only sniff of game opposite xxxx, xxx, xxx, Kxx is in hearts, and particularly at MPs it may be important to play in hearts (add the K♦ and 4♥ outscores 5♣ even if both make). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluecalm Posted April 5, 2012 Author Report Share Posted April 5, 2012 The only sniff of game opposite xxxx, xxx, xxx, Kxx is in hearts, and particularly at MPs it may be important to play in hearts (add the K♦ and 4♥ outscores 5♣ even if both make). Partner would bid 3H with that hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyberyeti Posted April 5, 2012 Report Share Posted April 5, 2012 Partner would bid 3H with that hand.Interesting, I had this discussion with partner recently and he wasn't sure what he'd bid with 3-3 with better holding in the minor or 2-2 similar, but the same applies to xxxxx, xx, Jxx, Kxx or xxxx, xxx, Kx, Kxxx. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S2000magic Posted April 5, 2012 Report Share Posted April 5, 2012 I'd be inclined to bid 4♥: if partner has as little as 2 small hearts and the ♣K or ♦K we'll make game (barring a 5-1 heart split). That doesn't seem too far a stretch: with 8 hearts out his fair share is 2-2/3, and even if his only honor is, say, the ♠A we still make it if the opening lead is a spade (not everyone leads partner's minor suit). Furthermore, I wouldn't expect partner to raise 3♥ to 4♥ holding only 2 small hearts and the ♣K or ♦K . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lalldonn Posted April 5, 2012 Report Share Posted April 5, 2012 I'd be inclined to bid 4♥: if partner has as little as 2 small hearts and the ♣K or ♦K we'll make game (barring a 5-1 heart split). That doesn't seem too far a stretch: with 8 hearts out his fair share is 2-2/3, and even if his only honor is, say, the ♠A we still make it if the opening lead is a spade (not everyone leads partner's minor suit). Furthermore, I wouldn't expect partner to raise 3♥ to 4♥ holding only 2 small hearts and the ♣K or ♦K .You are misanalyzing. 3 losers in hearts is not the same as game in hearts. Let's say hearts are 4-2 and partner has the club king. They will lead spades or diamonds until you ruff. You draw trumps in 4 rounds. And then.... you concede the rest? If he has the king of diamonds it's even worse. In your efforts to get the clubs set up you will get tapped out in spades even if hearts are 3-3! In addition, you can't say partner's average heart length is 2.67 because we showed hearts and clubs and he didn't bid hearts. He will never, or at best rarely, have 3 or more hearts. Since he won't have more than 2 his average length is less than 2 and he will very often have just 1 or even 0. 4♥ on this hand is a massive overbid. I would bid 4♣. 3♥ is interesting and understandable, but rather dispicible with the UI. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S2000magic Posted April 5, 2012 Report Share Posted April 5, 2012 You are misanalyzing.Wouldn't be the first time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nige1 Posted April 6, 2012 Report Share Posted April 6, 2012 (edited) [hv=pc=n&n=shakqj6dq4cqjt953&d=e&v=e&b=6&a=pp1d2np3cp]133|200| bluecalm asks "Casual partnership. No special agreements. Your bid ? it's matchpoints IMO 3♦ = 10, 3♠ = 9,, 4♣ = 8, 3♥ = 7, 4♥ = 6IMO, 3♥ should normally show longer ♥ than ♣ but I can understand a player making an exception on this hand.[/hv] The problem is rather untypical. I was W and I asked about 2NT (it was alerted) when it was my turn. It was explained as "club preempt". I passed and 2NT bidder bid 3H which was raised to 4. I called TD because I felt 4H was difficult to reach without UI. TD basically ignored me :)Full hand: http://www.pzbs.pl/w.../ldgppp006.html From East's "♣ pre-empt " explanation it seems that East misunderstood West's intended meaning for 3♣. The explanation is UI to West. West should try to avoid bids like 3♥ that would correct East's misconceptions about his shape and strength. Here, for example, 4♣ seems like a logical alternative. IMO, West's suspected use of UI appears to have damaged N-S, so the director should adjust. Edited April 7, 2012 by nige1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Statto Posted April 6, 2012 Report Share Posted April 6, 2012 I'd like to bid 3♠. It certainly shows the "good" type of hand, and I think should be 1st round control. Why waste space with 4♠? But if I'm showing controls I should bid 3♥. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted April 6, 2012 Report Share Posted April 6, 2012 just wonder if starting with 2c not 2nt might work better granted 2c over 1d can be pretty wide...extremely wide range. 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.