JEC hand

[mike777]

both vul imps

 

 

P=P=(2h)=?

 

 

AQ8532...void....AK3.....KJ73

 

 

very interesting play and defense on this one also.

[ahydra]

I voted for X - as much as I'd like to bid 3S, the suit is pretty bad.

 

ahydra

[thomas c]

i voted double but im not sure what agreements i should have for an immediate 3s vs a jump to 4s after 3c,3d. but with both vul im willing to take the chance that part will pass. i hope someone will discuss at length response agreements over bids like this cause i know i need some.

[mikeh]

i voted double but im not sure what agreements i should have for an immediate 3s vs a jump to 4s after 3c,3d. but with both vul im willing to take the chance that part will pass. i hope someone will discuss at length response agreements over bids like this cause i know i need some.

I have no idea why you'd double then jump to 4♠ over 3m by partner.

 

Even absent a common agreement, such as lebensohl, doubling then bidding 3♠ shows a strong hand. However, with lebensohl in play, and I can't imagine it wasn't, then bidding 3♠ after a value-showing 3m is 100% forcing.

 

Given that when partner bids 3♣, we may have a club slam on a hand on which 4♠ fails, it seems to me to be wrong to insist upon spades. The same is true, to a lesser extent, over 3♦ by partner.

 

I also think it common to distinguish between the 2 direct spade jump overcalls and double followed by spades. Generally speaking the double promises a more flexible hand while the direct jump conveys the message that we intend to play in spades. A suit of AQ8xxx is not even remotely in that category, even if we were, say, 6133.

[han]

Double is standout imo.

[gszes]

starting with x and following with 3s (unless p bids 2s:)) shows a hand similar

to a direct jump to 3s (over 2h) with the main difference being one of suit quality.

The direct jump assures p that the spade suit is pretty darn good. The x then 3s

actually is a plea for help in spades. A case can be made that a 2S overcall is

better for this hand and I respect that but there is so much in the way of playing

value here that I think 2s undervalues the offesive potential of this hand.

 

IMO x=10 3s=7 2s=6 4s=3

[lmilne]

Hit it, what happens next

[mike777]

ONE TABLE x and ended up in 4s making 5.

 

The Italian bid 2s and ended up in 6s making.

 

pard had:

 

KJXX...T9876...QJ...XX

 

I found the play and defense also interesting.

 

http://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?lin=pn|JEC,Harmon,giorginod,chorush|st%7C%7Cmd%7C4S49JKH6789TDJQC24%2CS6H2345QAD4579C58%2CS2358QAHD3KAC37JK%2C%7Crh%7C%7Cah%7CBoard%2010%7Csv%7Cb%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7C2H%7Cmb%7C2S%7Cmb%7C3H%7Cmb%7C4S%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7C6S%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cpc%7CHK%7Cpc%7CH6%7Cpc%7CH5%7Cpc%7CS2%7Cpc%7CD3%7Cpc%7CD2%7Cpc%7CDJ%7Cpc%7CD4%7Cpc%7CDQ%7Cpc%7CD5%7Cpc%7CDA%7Cpc%7CD6%7Cpc%7CDK%7Cpc%7CD8%7Cpc%7CC2%7Cpc%7CD7%7Cpc%7CCK%7Cpc%7CCA%7Cpc%7CC4%7Cpc%7CC5%7Cpc%7CC6%7Cpc%7CH7%7Cpc%7CC8%7Cpc%7CCJ%7Cpc%7CC3%7Cpc%7CCT%7Cpc%7CSJ%7Cpc%7CD9%7Cpc%7CS4%7Cpc%7CS6%7Cpc%7CSA%7Cpc%7CS7%7Cmc%7C12%7C

[diana_eva]

ONE TABLE x and ended up in 4s making 5.

 

The Italian bid 2s and ended up in 6s making.

 

pard had:

 

KJXX...T9876...QJ...XX

 

I found the play and defense also interesting.

 

http://www.bridgebas...S7%7Cmc%7C12%7C

 

Yup, nice hand. A friend showed this hand to me pointing out that a D back from East after cashing club Ace can set. Glad you posted it. I was curious to hear what others say bec DD shows it makes regardless.

[thomas c]

I have no idea why you'd double then jump to 4♠ over 3m by partner.

 

Even absent a common agreement, such as lebensohl, doubling then bidding 3♠ shows a strong hand. However, with lebensohl in play, and I can't imagine it wasn't, then bidding 3♠ after a value-showing 3m is 100% forcing.

 

does bidding 3s show 6? i simply thought that bidding 4s would show willingness to play opposite a doubleton. as i stated i dont really have agreements here and i know im out of touch.