Fluffy Posted June 15, 2012 Report Share Posted June 15, 2012 playing against Bulgarain Mihov& Karakolev, you get this: ♠K84♥963♦AJ62♣KJ8 at unfavourable (they are non vul, we are vul) The bidding starts with a precision 2♣ in your left, and partner overcalls 3♠, we had agreed that 2♠ is strong, but 3♠ is preemptive (feel free to say if this agreement is good or bad). RHO hestitaes a lot, and while you are thinking about the merits of 3NT to protect the lead and hopefully roll 9 tricks home you see RHO pulls 5♣ from the bidding box, wait, is it 5♣? no it is 5♠! (2♣)-3♠-(5♠)-??? now wtf do you do, what is your plan if they bid 6♣/6♥ next? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanoi5 Posted June 15, 2012 Report Share Posted June 15, 2012 I'd pass. Trying to look like a guy who doesn't want to double. Maybe I should double 5 spades for the lead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wank Posted June 16, 2012 Report Share Posted June 16, 2012 defend and hope whatever they bid goes off - to think of doubling slam after opps make a grand slam try is just insulting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted June 16, 2012 Report Share Posted June 16, 2012 I play 3♠ as intermediate. Its something I always discuss but I'm not sure its ever come up. If it is preemptive we are probably beating 6♣ and double would suggest sacrificing which partner will do with a void club. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted June 16, 2012 Report Share Posted June 16, 2012 By the way considering 3N is terrible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gszes Posted June 16, 2012 Report Share Posted June 16, 2012 x for the spade lead alone---we do not mind giving the opps the opportunity to show first round spade contol (which one of themhopefully has) because we want to encourage them to bid seven of something. A spade lead against 7 should be safe andthe road on how to defend should soon become clear. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the hog Posted June 16, 2012 Report Share Posted June 16, 2012 X for the S lead. Passing suggests no S honour the way I play.By the way, I agree that even thinking about 3NT is poor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted June 16, 2012 Author Report Share Posted June 16, 2012 I though that any lead but a heart gave me a very good chance of making 3NT, and its not like 3♠ is going to be super fantastic contract so it was worth the risk. partner having ♠A+ a heart card is not unthinkable at this vul either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted June 16, 2012 Author Report Share Posted June 16, 2012 X for the S lead. I will help you a bit:RHO has spade void, with less than opening strenght RHO in milton work points he is trying for grand slam, so he must have long solid hearts where you have to dully assist first 3 rounds, LHO has at most 3 diamonds where you hold the ace, make your own conclusions about the lead. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jallerton Posted June 16, 2012 Report Share Posted June 16, 2012 I think double of 5♠ here shows spade support, suggesting that partner compete to 6♠ over 6♣. Presumably 5♠ shows a spade void, so why would you want to play double as asking for a spade lead? If you must agree to use double as lead directing, it should ask for a specified unbid suit. Then, if partner remembers this, when you pass he will often lead the suit double didn't ask for. Although I play WJOs over 1-level openers, I prefer to play (2♣Precision)-3♠ as constructive because:(i) (2♣)-2♠ cannot be as wide a range as (1♣)-1♠; partner will often pass 2♠ on hands where he would have kept the bidding open over 1♠.(ii) having to double 2♣ on a decent single-suiter in undesirable.(iii)the 2♣ opening is quite well defined in strength and shape and pre-empting is less likely to give the opponents a problem. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted June 16, 2012 Report Share Posted June 16, 2012 I don't see anything wrong with considering 3NT. If partner has AQxxxx AKx xx xx or AQJxx KQx Qx xxx, 3NT is a good game and 4♠ is awful. Presumably partner can have less than that, though, so we're probably only worth an invitation. I'd bid a natural 2NT if it was available. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwnn Posted June 16, 2012 Report Share Posted June 16, 2012 I don't see anything wrong with considering 3NT. If partner has AQxxxx AKx xx xx or AQJxx KQx Qx xxx, 3NT is a good game and 4♠ is awful. Presumably partner can have less than that, though, so we're probably only worth an invitation. I'd bid a natural 2NT if it was available.It's not available. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the hog Posted June 16, 2012 Report Share Posted June 16, 2012 I don't see anything wrong with considering 3NT. If partner has AQxxxx AKx xx xx or AQJxx KQx Qx xxx, 3NT is a good game and 4♠ is awful. Presumably partner can have less than that, though, so we're probably only worth an invitation. I'd bid a natural 2NT if it was available. I assume you are being sarcastic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nabooba Posted June 16, 2012 Report Share Posted June 16, 2012 3NT is clearly off the planet. Based on a previous post of yours you presumably bid 6♦. I don't know whether I agree with this. If they double, 6♠ may well prove to be expensive. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gordontd Posted June 16, 2012 Report Share Posted June 16, 2012 we had agreed that 2♠ is strong, but 3♠ is preemptive (2♣)-3♠-(5♠)-??? If partner has AQxxxx AKx xx xx or AQJxx KQx Qx xxx, 3NT is a good game and 4♠ is awful. They don't look pre-emptive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted June 16, 2012 Report Share Posted June 16, 2012 Sorry, I thought partner had bid 2♠. Suddenly it all makes sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmnka447 Posted June 16, 2012 Report Share Posted June 16, 2012 While quite a few posters are drooling over defending a ♣ slam, defensive prospects may not be as bright as you think. If the 2 ♣ opener holds something like ♣ AQ10xx, you may not have a ♣ trick. The hand ought to be pretty clear to you once the 5 ♠ bid is made. It forces to at least 6, so responder must have a ♠ void, a big club fit and a source of a lot of tricks. From your hand, you can see that must be solid ♥s. Unfortunately, you don't have a clue exactly what the ♣ situation is, so you've got to pass. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ggwhiz Posted June 16, 2012 Report Share Posted June 16, 2012 5♠ is either a general grand slam try that has to have a ♦ void in it or if it's an exclusion key card bid it's gambling in nature and likely about to come to grief. That is especially provided you just pass and let pard lead a stiff ♦. Why not just ask what 5♠ means? If it's door number 2 I'll smash 6♣ when they get there and if it's door #1 a ♦ lead is still best for our side. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted June 16, 2012 Author Report Share Posted June 16, 2012 it is exclusion blackwood Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted June 16, 2012 Author Report Share Posted June 16, 2012 [hv=pc=w&s=sk85h972daj62ckj8&w=sqt92hqdk83caq963&n=saj7643hjt6dq954c&e=shak8543dt7ct7542&d=w&v=1&b=1&a=2c3s5sp6cppp]399|300[/hv] Partner made the normal lead of ♥J and declarer simply cashed ♣A from hand and proceed to run hearts from dummy to claim his slam. 6♠ would be 500 only, but another interesting point is..... do opponents play DEPO over 6 something?, if they do they might easilly end up in 7♣! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the hog Posted June 16, 2012 Report Share Posted June 16, 2012 Some nutters at this table - 3 of them in fact. The 3S bidder is a mild nutter; the 5S bidder is a total nutter. The third nutter? The one who was thinking about bidding 3NT over 3S. :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lalldonn Posted June 16, 2012 Report Share Posted June 16, 2012 Some nutters at this table - 3 of them in fact. The 3S bidder is a mild nutter; the 5S bidder is a total nutter. The third nutter? The one who was thinking about bidding 3NT over 3S. :lol:I agree x 3! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted June 17, 2012 Report Share Posted June 17, 2012 6♠ would be 500 onlyIsn't it 800, assumng that they crash the heart honours? You said in your original post that we were at unfavourable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted June 17, 2012 Author Report Share Posted June 17, 2012 yes, sorry 800 it is, but maybe we go plus if they screw up with depo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted June 17, 2012 Report Share Posted June 17, 2012 It's easy to say this seeing all four hands, but I think partner should lead a diamond, not a heart. If dummy's bidding is based on a strong side suit, it's likely to be hearts, not diamonds. 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.