RunemPard Posted September 6, 2012 Report Share Posted September 6, 2012 MPs ♠AT9862♥7♦AKQJ53♣--- In our methods the bidding went 1♠-3♠Partner has not yet learned Exclusion, but has some knowledge of control bidding. Some thoughts of mine and partner's hand... After this board I am debating having us start playing 2NT as limit+. Partner holds the worst hand possible for us. ♠754♥KQ84♦97♣AQ54 Our auction was entertaining...ending up in 5♣-5. I knew that my partner may have issues understanding 5♣, but having told her many times to never ask aces with a void and learning control bidding I thought she would continue. 1♠-3♠4♣-4♥5♣-AP My logic was that slam was worth a shot with partner holding the ♥A and any 3 spades.Slam is also alright with Kxx in ♠.GS may be on with as little as Kxx in ♠ and the ♥A on a good night. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antrax Posted September 6, 2012 Report Share Posted September 6, 2012 Don't you have a meta-agreement not to look for alternate trump suits once you've established a major-suit fit? Did you ask your partner later when she thought your bids meant? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RunemPard Posted September 6, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 6, 2012 Don't you have a meta-agreement not to look for alternate trump suits once you've established a major-suit fit? Did you ask your partner later when she thought your bids meant? Yes..The first thing I told her was..."I don't care if you were confused, we had already decided ♠ are trump." Followed by "Your pass was lazy and thoughtless." And the other common fights that occur when a couple plays bridge. She said that she liked her ♣s better than her ♠s. In her defense, she is still learning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricK Posted September 6, 2012 Report Share Posted September 6, 2012 Having looked at the hand I don't like the 3♠ bid at all. While "support with support" is a good general principle, I don't think 3 small qualifies as 3 level support when there are a number of other possible places to play which might well be better. Obviously your partner was wrong with the final pass as well, but if I were playing with a weak partner and suspected the bidding might come off the rails in a cue-bidding sequence then I would have just blasted 6♠ on the second round. Note that your bidding sequence didn't actually tell you what you needed to know anyway. If partner had bid 5♠ instead of pass, you wouldn't have known whether to go on or not! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RunemPard Posted September 6, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 6, 2012 Having looked at the hand I don't like the 3♠ bid at all. While "support with support" is a good general principle, I don't think 3 small qualifies as 3 level support when there are a number of other possible places to play which might well be better. Obviously your partner was wrong with the final pass as well, but if I were playing with a weak partner and suspected the bidding might come off the rails in a cue-bidding sequence then I would have just blasted 6♠ on the second round. Note that your bidding sequence didn't actually tell you what you needed to know anyway. If partner had bid 5♠ instead of pass, you wouldn't have known whether to go on or not! If I was trusting her bidding, 5♠ would have to show poor spades and no first round control in ♥. She already said that she has no ♦ control by passing it up. But I agree that I could have just blasted 6♠ down 1 or 2 with her. I know that she doesn't know 5N from her would be GSF so I suppose my 5♣ was fishing for a confused pass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gordontd Posted September 6, 2012 Report Share Posted September 6, 2012 I suppose my 5♣ was fishing for a confused pass.Which information you wouldn't have been able to use. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zelandakh Posted September 6, 2012 Report Share Posted September 6, 2012 Robson advocates the first bid after 1M - 3M being a natural slam try, arguing that Opener can easily be 2-suited here and this allows the partnership to better judge the likelihood for slam. If you are going to blast 6 with this hand then why not 6♦ to give a choice? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Codo Posted September 6, 2012 Report Share Posted September 6, 2012 In Germany they tried to divide limit raises into 4 and 3 card raises for beginners (Accrding to SEF). Most teachers disagreed, so they switched it back. And I am fine with that, there are bigger problems to solve then this one. For example: Do not pass 5 clubs when you are confused.... :) I think I had blast 6 Spade after 4 Heart, actually I guess that this is the best bid after 3 ♠ too. As you told us, there had been no way to find out, whether or not she holds the critical cards in the majors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricK Posted September 6, 2012 Report Share Posted September 6, 2012 Robson advocates the first bid after 1M - 3M being a natural slam try, arguing that Opener can easily be 2-suited here and this allows the partnership to better judge the likelihood for slam. If you are going to blast 6 with this hand then why not 6♦ to give a choice?I agree that 4♦ might be a better initial slam try than 4♣, but blasting 6♦ is worse (IMO) than blasting 6♠. The main downside is that it increases the chances that the defense get off to the best lead. You know that partner's ♠ are overwhelmingly likely to be better than his ♦ (stronger and longer), so you will nearly always get a preference back to ♠ anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted September 6, 2012 Report Share Posted September 6, 2012 Yes..The first thing I told her was..."I don't care if you were confused, we had already decided ♠ are trump." Followed by "Your pass was lazy and thoughtless." And the other common fights that occur when a couple plays bridge. I only hear these comments when idiots play bridge. I strongly believe that it is possible to play bridge with your spouse and for both to have a good time. Perhaps I'm biased because my girlfriend has already learned exclusion. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RunemPard Posted September 6, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 6, 2012 I only hear these comments when idiots play bridge. I strongly believe that it is possible to play bridge with your spouse and for both to have a good time. Perhaps I'm biased because my girlfriend has already learned exclusion. We always have a good time...we just tend to bicker too much. She does learn fast, just not as much willingness and interest. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antrax Posted September 6, 2012 Report Share Posted September 6, 2012 Perhaps I'm biased because my girlfriend has already learned exclusion.You have a girlfriend? I was sure you're like 500 years old. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted September 6, 2012 Report Share Posted September 6, 2012 Ouch, I'm perceived as another the Hog? Is it my archaic bidding, my general grumpiness or my poor typing skills? For what it is worth, I'm roughly half as old as the average bridge player. Sadly that's getting closer and closer to 500. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antrax Posted September 7, 2012 Report Share Posted September 7, 2012 :) It's just your gruff, tough-love manner, like a Bridge-playing Clint Eastwood. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gszes Posted September 7, 2012 Report Share Posted September 7, 2012 sometims the best result possible is diffcult to acheive when thereis a language barrier (ie bidding) btn partners. Instead try thinkingof a way to get the best result possible under the circumstances. There is no reasonable/safe way to search for 7 so why not just bid5s asking p to bid 6 with decent spades. Sure it will miss some slamswhen p has the heart A and 4 small spades but at least your going tobe in the ball park instead of confusing your p in a bidding sequence youknow they will not understand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted September 7, 2012 Report Share Posted September 7, 2012 :) It's just your gruff, tough-love manner, like a Bridge-playing Clint Eastwood. Nothing wrong with shooting as long as the right people get shot! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil_20686 Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 Ouch, I'm perceived as another the Hog? Is it my archaic bidding, my general grumpiness or my poor typing skills? For what it is worth, I'm roughly half as old as the average bridge player. Sadly that's getting closer and closer to 500. For me it was just the assumption that you already had a bridge widow. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil_20686 Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 Nothing wrong with shooting as long as the right people get shot! Especially those evil empty chairs. 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.