Fluffy Posted November 24, 2012 Report Share Posted November 24, 2012 ♠K95♥A1076♦10974♣Q4 unfavourable (opponents not vul), partner deals 1♦-(double)-1♥-(2♣)double-(3♣)-?? LHO don't know what 3♣ is about nor seem to care. partner's double was support, he must hold at least 4♦ now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrAce Posted November 24, 2012 Report Share Posted November 24, 2012 I voted pass, but i reconsidered and changed my mind. I would bid 3♦ pd has 4+ ♦ and exactly 3♥ and will have no clue that i have 4 cards ♦ if i pass. 3343 4342 3352 2353 Those are the most likely hands pd will hold, anything more unbalanced than this will work in favour of our 3♦ bid. In those shapes obviously hand #1 it will be bad to bid 3♦, #2 we have only 8 card fit but they do have 9 card clubs. I would prefer to play 3♦ because this may gain when/if it is wrong and they bid again. #3 we have 9 card fit and they have 9 card fit, everyone prefers to be in 3♦ #4 we have 9 card fit and they have 8, again i would like to bid 3♦, this may gain also when it is wrong but they bid 4♣. No need to mention pd is very unlikely to hold only 2 spades, when opponents have 8 of them and none of them bid it eventhough they competed to 3 level. Qx ♣ is a negative value i am aware but i also don't expect to be doubled when our side has more than the half of the deck at 3 level. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gszes Posted November 24, 2012 Report Share Posted November 24, 2012 ♠K95♥A1076♦10974♣Q4 unfavourable (opponents not vul), partner deals 1♦-(double)-1♥-(2♣)double-(3♣)-?? LHO don't know what 3♣ is about nor seem to care. partner's double was support, he must hold at least 4♦ now. While i see no reason p cannot be 4333 I agree that there is a very high%probability p has 4+ diamonds. As long as p will realize 3d is compeitiveand x will show power I see little reason to worry about bidding 3d here.My major suit holdings make it very difficult for rho to x 3d due to tricks offthe top and p will be able to play the hand double dummy. As long as we do not go down more than 2 there is a great chance we will be better off thanis we meekly let them play 3c. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Molyb Posted November 25, 2012 Report Share Posted November 25, 2012 Partner is probably minimum unless an opponent is slightly overbidding.He also has 3-3-5-2 or something very, very similar. I will risk 3 diamonds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted November 25, 2012 Author Report Share Posted November 25, 2012 While i see no reason p cannot be 4333 ain't that I wrote in the OP that he cannot have 3 diamonds a good reason? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted November 25, 2012 Report Share Posted November 25, 2012 3♦ looks normal to me. If he's 3352, defending 3♣ will probably be wrong. Even if he is 3343, 3♦ may be right; for example QJx KQx KQxx xxx would be OK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhm Posted November 25, 2012 Report Share Posted November 25, 2012 3♦ looks normal to me. If he's 3352, defending 3♣ will probably be wrong. Even if he is 3343, 3♦ may be right; for example QJx KQx KQxx xxx would be OK.I think it is close.You have the ♣queen, not likely to be useful should we declare, we are vulnerable and balanced and we have no honors in diamonds.The fact that opponents did not compete in spades makes it likely that partner is 3-3 in the majors and since he will not pass with six diamonds and a singleton club, his only likely distributions are 3343 or 3352 and 11-14 HCP. I lean towards pass here. If partner is 3343 bidding on is likely to be terrible. Even if they do not double we might well go down two. If partner is 3352 bidding on may be right but that is not guaranteed. Even if there are 18 total trumps there may not be 18 total tricks here. Rainer Herrmann Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted November 25, 2012 Report Share Posted November 25, 2012 ain't that I wrote in the OP that he cannot have 3 diamonds a good reason?It seemed like a good enough reason when I voted for 3♦. Couple that with the fact that you didn't write in the OP that 1♣ was artificial and I don't know very many players who open 1d with 3-3 m's regardless of relative strength of the two suits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilKing Posted November 25, 2012 Report Share Posted November 25, 2012 I don't think one should be allowed to vote in one's own poll. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted November 26, 2012 Author Report Share Posted November 26, 2012 yeah, that would be fine Phil, I don't like it much either.[hv=pc=n&s=sk72hat76dt974cq4&w=sq93h842da85cj973&n=s854hk93dkqj3cat2&e=sajt6hqj5d62ck865]399|300[/hv] perfect defence should defeat 3♦ but nobody made it, some 130's were avaible, 3♣ passed out scored the dreaded +100 in the form of 2 down undoubled, wich got 12% of the MPs, 110 would not be much better, with most people playing 1NT making 8+ tricks. Double was the big winner. 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.