yin970902 Posted August 16, 2012 Report Share Posted August 16, 2012 play 2/1.♠AK♥6♦AKJ9862♣Q97 1♦--Pass--1♠--Pass3♦--Pass--3NT--Pass? Do you bid pass or 5♦,any others? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrAce Posted August 16, 2012 Report Share Posted August 16, 2012 Pass Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the hog Posted August 16, 2012 Report Share Posted August 16, 2012 I pass. Partner has heard the bidding, hasn't she? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted August 16, 2012 Report Share Posted August 16, 2012 I object to 3D. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyberyeti Posted August 16, 2012 Report Share Posted August 16, 2012 I object to 3D.Playing standard methods, what else ? I'm glad I have 1♦-1♠-2N (GF unbalanced)-3♣-3♦ to show this hand. Partner can have holdings where you're making a diamond slam or not making 3N, but I think you have to pass 3N playing standard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dake50 Posted August 16, 2012 Report Share Posted August 16, 2012 Nothing wrong with 3NT as the general rebid.But is 6D worth exploring? I have self-splinter 4H.At worst directing opponents defense to 4NT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted August 16, 2012 Report Share Posted August 16, 2012 Playing standard methods, what else ? I guess you could bid 3D. Then, when you have to place the dummy you hide the king of diamonds behind the rest, only discovering it when partner notes that you have 12 cards. Standard methods. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyberyeti Posted August 16, 2012 Report Share Posted August 16, 2012 I guess you could bid 3D. Then, when you have to place the dummy you hide the king of diamonds behind the rest, only discovering it when partner notes that you have 12 cards. Standard methods.You didn't answer the question, what do you bid if you don't bid 3♦ ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted August 16, 2012 Report Share Posted August 16, 2012 You didn't answer the question, what do you bid if you don't bid 3♦ ? I think he bids 3♣. I can't imagine anything else. Good hand for an artificial 2N. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CSGibson Posted August 16, 2012 Report Share Posted August 16, 2012 4♦ now. 3♦ on about 8 1/2 tricks in hand does seem like an underbid, I'll try and convey my extra trick of strength here & allow for cue-bidding. If partner signs off in 4N, I'll let it go. 2nd choice would be 4N, 3rd pass. Way, way down on the list is 5♦ - that is a truly horrible bid in my opinion, one extra diamond does not mean you force that strain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted August 16, 2012 Report Share Posted August 16, 2012 I think he bids 3♣. I can't imagine anything else. Good hand for an artificial 2N. I actually bid an artificial 2H with my regular partner, after which my partner will likely bid 2S to ask what kind of hand I have. I realize that GF single minor suiters are a hassle in standard bidding. Still, it seems to me that the hand is too strong for 3D, and that is part of the issue here. Now that I've already hijacked the thread, let me continue. After 1D - 1S - 3S we play that 3H is either a heart stopper or spades (3S then asks), and 3S shows a club stopper. Given those methods at least we could be certain that partner has stoppers in both unbid suits for his 3NT bid. Maybe I have posted about this on the forums before, if so I may have called it Smit Extensions (or: Smit over 3 diamonds), after a Dutch bridge player whose last name is Smit. Unfortunately he claims he has nothing to do with this convention. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted August 16, 2012 Report Share Posted August 16, 2012 3♦ on about 8 1/2 tricks in hand does seem like an underbid Woohoo, I'm not alone anymore! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyberyeti Posted August 16, 2012 Report Share Posted August 16, 2012 Woohoo, I'm not alone anymore! You weren't alone from the start, as I said I have a gadget for this too, but playing absolute vanilla methods, it's awkward (unless your vanilla includes an Acol 2♦ which also works). My objection to 3♣ is that I barely have a stop let alone a suit, so partner will bid 3N on a singleton/xx when we should be elsewhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lalldonn Posted August 16, 2012 Report Share Posted August 16, 2012 3♦ is an underbid but only a small one (I wouldn't object at all if the jack of diamonds was a small one, or if one of the diamonds was a heart) and the shape is off for anything else. Obviously there are artificial methods that would help, but without them I think it's ok. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted August 16, 2012 Report Share Posted August 16, 2012 Woohoo, I'm not alone anymore! Guys, get a room. (A partnership bidding room if that suits you) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrAce Posted August 16, 2012 Report Share Posted August 16, 2012 This is becoming fashion lately, to object someone else's reply and not answering the question that was asked by OP, or to object a previous bid and not answering the OP question 3♦ is not my cup of tea either, but i hate to see a thread turning into "my methods vs your methods" followed by some artificial suggestions to a simple question and not even bothering to reply " having bid 3♦ previously, i would bid this or that now. OP did not ask if we agree or like the bidding so far, it is of course ok to write your opinions anyway as long as you guys answer the freaking simple question. This would prevent the hijack. It is a simple question because since OP bid 3♦ without any further explenation we have to assume that 3♦ in their style includes hands like this. I agree with Han that he hijacked the thread and turned it to a different discussion. @OP : You are asking a question in expert forum, as much as i disagree the way Han, Josh and some others replied w/o an answer, the more i think the more i understand why they did this in this particular thread. Again, you are asking a question where pd was allowed to pass 3♦, now that he didnt let us in the middle of the road (i think we should be happy since we have slightly better hand than most 3♦ bids) are we supposed to drag him to slam or to some 4-5 level contracts which we have no idea how safe it is ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted August 16, 2012 Report Share Posted August 16, 2012 Having bid like this, I'd pass. Slam needs quite a lot. Even Qxxx Kxx Qx Axxx may not be enough, and he's much more likely to have some grot like Qxxxx KJx x Kxxx. Good hand for an artificial 2N.Not especially, Which side do you want declaring 3NT, if that's where we end up? I agree it's a good hand for some other artificial method. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyberyeti Posted August 16, 2012 Report Share Posted August 16, 2012 Not especially, Which side do you want declaring 3NT, if that's where we end up? I agree it's a good hand for some other artificial method.I don't know, our bad suit could be clubs as easily as hearts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lalldonn Posted August 16, 2012 Report Share Posted August 16, 2012 This is becoming fashion lately, to object someone else's reply and not answering the question that was asked by OP, or to object a previous bid and not answering the OP question 3♦ is not my cup of tea either, but i hate to see a thread turning into "my methods vs your methods" followed by some artificial suggestions to a simple question and not even bothering to reply " having bid 3♦ previously, i would bid this or that now. OP did not ask if we agree or like the bidding so far, it is of course ok to write your opinions anyway as long as you guys answer the freaking simple question. This would prevent the hijack. It is a simple question because since OP bid 3♦ without any further explenation we have to assume that 3♦ in their style includes hands like this. I agree with Han that he hijacked the thread and turned it to a different discussion. @OP : You are asking a question in expert forum, as much as i disagree the way Han, Josh and some others replied w/o an answer, the more i think the more i understand why they did this in this particular thread. Again, you are asking a question where pd was allowed to pass 3♦, now that he didnt let us in the middle of the road (i think we should be happy since we have slightly better hand than most 3♦ bids) are we supposed to drag him to slam or to some 4-5 level contracts which we have no idea how safe it is ?It's perfectly valid to question the earlier bidding when given a bidding problem, especially if it means you wouldn't be in the problem position because of it. Are you just having a bad day? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yin970902 Posted August 17, 2012 Author Report Share Posted August 17, 2012 Thank you!actually, ♠J9763♥KQ10♦7♣A863in the partner's hands.I agree with 3♦ is an underbid but only a small one,so bid 4♦ is good idea.4♦ now. 3♦ on about 8 1/2 tricks in hand does seem like an underbid, I'll try and convey my extra trick of strength here & allow for cue-bidding. If partner signs off in 4N, I'll let it go. 2nd choice would be 4N, 3rd pass. Way, way down on the list is 5♦ - that is a truly horrible bid in my opinion, one extra diamond does not mean you force that strain. Chris Gibson 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrAce Posted August 17, 2012 Report Share Posted August 17, 2012 It's perfectly valid to question the earlier bidding when given a bidding problem, especially if it means you wouldn't be in the problem position because of it. Are you just having a bad day? No i am not having a bad day, sorry if it sounded like this. You know how much i love your posts and yourself as a person (although i am just predicting your personality from your replies and from your reactions when things get hot in forums) :) 3♦ is an underbid but only a small one (I wouldn't object at all if the jack of diamonds was a small one, or if one of the diamonds was a heart) and the shape is off for anything else. Obviously there are artificial methods that would help, but without them I think it's ok. It's perfectly valid to question the earlier bidding when given a bidding problem, especially if it means you wouldn't be in the problem position because of it. ... I think your first reply speaks for itself and explains why i was expecting an answer :) I don't mind questioning the previous bid. But if you think a bid is OK or close to be OK, we can live with the continuation, even if it is the main reason why your are in a problem situation, no ? Don't we all have some holes in our choosen system where some hands dont fit in anywhere and we have to choose the least annoying one ? -3♦ is a perfect bid if their system includes hands like this-3♦ is a judgement call (good or bad ) if this hand does not fit in perfectly in any bid in their choosen system-3♦ is a bad bid if they have something else available for this hand and/or if it definetely denies such a hand. (which is totally out of our control since the problem was given to us w/o much information) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted August 17, 2012 Report Share Posted August 17, 2012 I don't know, our bad suit could be clubs as easily as hearts. No, not nearly as easily. Not only do we hold a club stopper and a stiff heart, partner also bypassed hearts. Regarding the original question, I don't like it because not only are we forced to bid 3D which I wouldn't do, we are also not told about partner's options over 3D. Perhaps without agreements 3H shows at least 5-4 in the majors, which is silly since we more or less denied 4 hearts already. But playing without agreements partner could have a heart stopper or a club stopper or both, and we are just guessing. If you are forcing me to flip a coin, I'll flip pass of course, but I really don't like being in this situation. To Josh, I would also bid 3D with a 2-2-6-3 distribution and the same honors (which would make it a normal maximum), but I think that that's a big difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluecalm Posted August 17, 2012 Report Share Posted August 17, 2012 Playing standard methods, what else ? This is expert forum so let's assume we play some decent system. Of course this too strong for 3D so I bid w/e there is to show strong hand be it 2H, 2N or 3C.I object calling a system without a way to show very common hand type "standard", let's call it "american traditional system" ATS from now on. Anyway, now I pass. What else ? Don't we all have some holes in our choosen system where some hands dont fit in anywhere and we have to choose the least annoying one ? But in ATS the openings are in range of 11-22 and we are ignoring 16-22 part altogether in most sequences if we don't have 5-5 or 5-4 strong enough to force to game opposite mere 1/1 response.It's not "some hole" it's just ancient, terrible and difficult to play system which has no business being discussed in expert forum unless for historical reasons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lalldonn Posted August 17, 2012 Report Share Posted August 17, 2012 I love you too, next to you I am only MrKing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted August 17, 2012 Report Share Posted August 17, 2012 But in ATS the openings are in range of 11-22 and we are ignoring 16-22 part altogether in most sequences if we don't have 5-5 or 5-4 strong enough to force to game opposite mere 1/1 response.It's not "some hole" it's just ancient, terrible and difficult to play system which has no business being discussed in expert forum unless for historical reasons.If experts wish to use this forum to discuss how an expert should bid when playing this system, why shouldn't they? You don't have to participate in the discussion. 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.