Bbradley62 Posted August 6, 2012 Report Share Posted August 6, 2012 [hv=lin=pn|lorukk,~~M41635,~~M41633,~~M41634|st%7C%7Cmd%7C2S34JH2QKAD59TAC58%2CS8KH57D268JC4JQKA%2CS59TQAH468TDKC367%2C%7Crh%7C%7Cah%7CBoard%204%7Csv%7Cb%7Cmb%7C1C%7Can%7CMinor%20suit%20opening%20--%203%2B%20C%3B%2011-21%20HCP%3B%2012-22%20total%20points%20%7Cmb%7C1S%7Can%7COne-level%20overcall%20--%205%2B%20S%3B%208-17%20HCP%3B%209-19%20total%20points%20%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7C2C%7Can%7CGood%20support%20in%20S%20--%203%2B%20S%3B%2010%2B%20total%20points%7Cmb%7Cd%7Can%7C11-21%20HCP%3B%20rebiddable%20C%3B%207%2B%208421%20HCP%20in%20C%3B%2012-22%20total%20points%20%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7C3S%7Can%7C3%2B%20S%3B%2010%2B%20total%20points%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cpc%7CCT%7Cpc%7CC5%7Cpc%7CC4%7Cpc%7CC3%7Cpc%7CC2%7Cpc%7CC8%7Cpc%7CCJ%7Cpc%7CC6%7Cpc%7CCQ%7Cpc%7CC7%7Cpc%7CC9%7Cpc%7CS3%7Cpc%7CSJ%7Cpc%7CSK%7Cpc%7CSA%7Cpc%7CS2%7Cpc%7CSQ%7Cpc%7CS6%7Cpc%7CS4%7Cpc%7CS8%7Cpc%7CST%7Cpc%7CS7%7Cpc%7CD5%7Cpc%7CD8%7Cpc%7CS9%7Cpc%7CD4%7Cpc%7CD9%7Cpc%7CD6%7Cpc%7CDK%7Cpc%7CD7%7Cpc%7CDT%7Cpc%7CD2%7Cpc%7CH4%7Cpc%7CH3%7Cpc%7CHK%7Cpc%7CH5%7Cpc%7CHA%7Cpc%7CH7%7Cpc%7CH6%7Cpc%7CH9%7Cpc%7CHQ%7Cpc%7CDJ%7Cpc%7CH8%7Cpc%7CHJ%7Cpc%7CDA%7Cpc%7CCK%7Cpc%7CHT%7Cpc%7CDQ%7Cpc%7CH2%7Cpc%7CCA%7Cpc%7CS5%7Cpc%7CD3%7C]360|270[/hv]It seems to me that South's 3♠ bid should be showing something more than his 2♣ bid had already shown, since he could have simply balanced with 2♠ (which would also have been explained as "3+S; 10+ total points") with a minimum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quantumcat Posted August 7, 2012 Report Share Posted August 7, 2012 Possibly GIB N showed a good hand by not bidding 2♠ himself (if forced to a certain contract, bidding it immediately shows the worst possible hand). GIB N is thinking that if you knew there was game opposite the most minimum of his "good hand"s then you would have bid game yourself, so feels safe passing your invitational 3♠. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bbradley62 Posted August 7, 2012 Author Report Share Posted August 7, 2012 Agreed. I'm suggesting that since the description of 2♠ as a second bid by South is "3+S; 10+ total points" and the description of 4♠ instead is "3+S; 16+ total points", the description of 3♠ should be "3+S; 13-15 total points". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bbradley62 Posted October 1, 2012 Author Report Share Posted October 1, 2012 Similar situation.[hv=lin=pn|~~M3013oj7,~~M524713o,bbradley62,~~M3587yio|st%7C%7Cmd%7C2S2469QHJQKD24JC5T%2CS8JH467AD59TAC24K%2CS357TAH3D78QKC79Q%2C%7Crh%7C%7Cah%7CBoard%208%7Csv%7Co%7Cmb%7C1D%7Can%7CMinor%20suit%20opening%20--%203%2B%20D%3B%2011-21%20HCP%3B%2012-22%20total%20points%20%7Cmb%7C1S%7Can%7COne-level%20overcall%20--%205%2B%20S%3B%208-17%20HCP%3B%209-%7Cmb%7Cd%7Can%7CNegative%20double%20--%204%2B%20H%3B%207%2B%20total%20points%20%7Cmb%7C2D%7Can%7CGood%20support%20in%20S%20--%203%2B%20S%3B%2010%2B%20total%20points%20%7Cmb%7C2H%7Can%7C3%2B%20D%3B%204%2B%20H%3B%2011%2B%20HCP%3B%2012-15%20total%20points%20%7Cmb%7C2S%7Can%7C5%2B%20S%3B%208-17%20HCP%3B%209-19%20total%20points%7Cmb%7C3H%7Can%7C5%2B%20H%3B%207-10%20total%20points%20%7Cmb%7C]360|270[/hv]After South's cuebid, North should have the choices of:* signing off/simply competing to 2♠* inviting to 4♠* bidding 4♠.Each of these three alternatives should be assigned different subsets of North's initial possible strength range (8-17HCP; 9-19 total), with the understanding that there's sometimes fudging based on extra trumps and other factors. Unfortunately, both 2♠ and 3♠ as North's second bid carry the same description as North's original 1♠ bid. 4♠ as a possible second bid said "15HCP"; not 14, not 16, exactly 15. Can we please tier the explanations of 2♠/3♠/4♠? Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cloa513 Posted October 5, 2012 Report Share Posted October 5, 2012 After South's cuebid, North should have the choices of:* signing off/simply competing to 2♠* inviting to 4♠* bidding 4♠.Each of these three alternatives should be assigned different subsets of North's initial possible strength range (8-17HCP; 9-19 total), with the understanding that there's sometimes fudging based on extra trumps and other factors. Unfortunately, both 2♠ and 3♠ as North's second bid carry the same description as North's original 1♠ bid. 4♠ as a possible second bid said "15HCP"; not 14, not 16, exactly 15. Can we please tier the explanations of 2♠/3♠/4♠? Thanks.It also has the choice of pass in this hand which should minimum hand with high card points in hearts. 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.