ahydra Posted March 14, 2013 Report Share Posted March 14, 2013 Both vul at MPs, playing weak NT and 4cM, you're in first chair. You open 1♦ on ♠- ♥AQxx ♦KJxxxx ♣Kxx, partner responds 2♣ and RHO chimes in with 2♠. What's your call? ahydra Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted March 14, 2013 Report Share Posted March 14, 2013 double looks ok at this point. I hope this shows short spades, nonminimum, no clear direction yet... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the hog Posted March 15, 2013 Report Share Posted March 15, 2013 3C Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveMoe Posted March 15, 2013 Report Share Posted March 15, 2013 3♣Switch my ♣ with my ♠ and I would double (easier to do if 2♣ is GF).... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Codo Posted March 15, 2013 Report Share Posted March 15, 2013 I would double, this sholud be my chance to show the hearts, but I can show clubs later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted March 15, 2013 Report Share Posted March 15, 2013 I don't know 4cM weak NT systems, but I have a perhaps silly metha rule that when pass is forcing double is penalty, so I pass. I am not acepting partner's double. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zelandakh Posted March 15, 2013 Report Share Posted March 15, 2013 Why would pass be forcing Gonzo? If it were, I would have expected the OP to include the information. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Posted March 15, 2013 Report Share Posted March 15, 2013 Really quick answer: 3♣. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilKing Posted March 15, 2013 Report Share Posted March 15, 2013 If 2♣ is not GF, I double for takeout. If 2♣ is GF I play double as penalties, so I would bid 3♣. If lefty bids 4♠ and partner doubles, I bid 4NT. If partner passes, I bid 4NT. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted March 15, 2013 Report Share Posted March 15, 2013 Pass is nf in this system and even though dbl is not penalty I have too little defense for it.I consider 3c a slight underside. I make the slight overbid of 3h and remove 3n to 5c Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ggwhiz Posted March 15, 2013 Report Share Posted March 15, 2013 Pass is nf in this system I was going to pass and await developments as I can't stand my t/o double to go float either BUT How can an opening bid opposite any 2/1 response sell out quietly to 2♠? I don't know this system at all but that does not compute. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gszes Posted March 15, 2013 Report Share Posted March 15, 2013 my hand has improved enormously- and we should have visions of slamracing through our head. Since it is still possible p has wasted spade valueswe should take a go slow approach for now and bid 3h waiting mostly to seeif p can bid 3n or not. x here seems wrong since we have clear direction for our side via 3n or 5/6/7of a minor. 3c is ok if playing a 2/1 (100% forcing) but otherwise it sounds far too competitivevs the monster this hand is becoming. the other benefit to 3h is that if p cannot bid 3n we will be able to bid a club contractand show partner our pattern. 3s as a splinter is also ok but it may be better to use that to ask for a spade stop witha more balanced hand and 4s bypasses 3n which could be our last makeable game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdano Posted March 16, 2013 Report Share Posted March 16, 2013 I hope all the 3♣ bidders think it is forcing! (Which I assume it isn't for the OP.) I can't stomach the thought of anyone bidding a non-forcing 3♣ with this monster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted March 16, 2013 Report Share Posted March 16, 2013 Why would pass be forcing Gonzo? If it were, I would have expected the OP to include the information. On the french std/sayc we played before 2/1, 2♣ was forcing to 2NT with some exceptions Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trinidad Posted March 16, 2013 Report Share Posted March 16, 2013 On the french std/sayc we played before 2/1, 2♣ was forcing to 2NT with some exceptionsI agree 100% with that, but this system looks more like Acol where 2♣ doesn't promise as good a hand as in SAYC or French standard. I think the OP could have mentioned what 2♣ showed. Rik Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ggwhiz Posted March 16, 2013 Report Share Posted March 16, 2013 On the french std/sayc we played before 2/1, 2♣ was forcing to 2NT with some exceptions I stand by pass then which gives us (pard) an extra descriptive kick at the can. 3♥ in particular is self-pre-empting. My next bid is probably 3♠ (depending on pards next call) followed by 4♣ and cue bidding from there. I hate stalling in 5 of a minor at mp's if pard bids nt along the way but if there was ever a hand for it this is it. Mind you if my lho raises to 3♠ my next bid pins the tail on the donkey.... me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ahydra Posted March 19, 2013 Author Report Share Posted March 19, 2013 These replies were interesting, sorry for the delay in replying (I've been moving house over the weekend). Seems to be reasonably fairly split between X and 3C. At the table this was actually my regular partner with this decision playing against me and I wanted to check he hadn't gone crazy by raising on three cards. He chose 3C and the auction proceeded (3S)-4C-(p); 4H-(X)-p-(p); 5C-(X)-out, down 800 when partner had AJx 8xxx --- QJxxxx. Clearly 2C is an overbid, 4C possibly even more so, with a void in partner's suit. I guess with a void in spades X is a little risky, but it feels like that's a good way to get the hearts into play. 3C could get us to a 4-3 fit... ahydra Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted March 19, 2013 Report Share Posted March 19, 2013 How can an opening bid opposite any 2/1 response sell out quietly to 2♠? I don't know this system at all but that does not compute.One important consequence of playing a weak nt is that opener is going to pass responder's 1NT bid with a balanced 16-count. Therefore responder has to bid at the 2-level with a decent 9-count. It is not forcing to 2NT or so, only to 2♦. I suppose one could agree to play that we can't defend undoubled after a 2/1 response. It is a bit dangerous since it could easily be best to defend 2♠ undoubled, at least when vulnerable at IMPs. But I am quite sure that it isn't standard among Acol players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted March 19, 2013 Report Share Posted March 19, 2013 Some observations: 1) A really quick question never is. 2) A 2/1 response agreement where defending 2S undoubled might be best makes this situation impossible. The posts by GGwhiz show why, and his choice to pass would have saved the day, this time with this partner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted March 19, 2013 Report Share Posted March 19, 2013 These replies were interesting, sorry for the delay in replying (I've been moving house over the weekend). Seems to be reasonably fairly split between X and 3C. At the table this was actually my regular partner with this decision playing against me and I wanted to check he hadn't gone crazy by raising on three cards. He chose 3C and the auction proceeded (3S)-4C-(p); 4H-(X)-p-(p); 5C-(X)-out, down 800 when partner had AJx 8xxx --- QJxxxx. Clearly 2C is an overbid, 4C possibly even more so, with a void in partner's suit. I guess with a void in spades X is a little risky, but it feels like that's a good way to get the hearts into play. 3C could get us to a 4-3 fit... ahydra Is 2c really the correct call in your style, 1h is not allowed in response to 1d? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ahydra Posted March 19, 2013 Author Report Share Posted March 19, 2013 Is 2c really the correct call in your style, 1h is not allowed in response to 1d? Not in my style, no - need a 10 count or equivalent for 2C (mainly to make 1x-2y-2NT = GF), and I would downgrade a little for the void in partner's suit. I and my partner would have bid 1H. But the person who made the 2C bid plays a more old-fashioned form of Acol where one can go to the 2-level on a flat hand with 8 HCP. I notice people talking about 2/1 forcing to 2NT. That's probably not a bad idea, and probably quite workable given my partner and I play fairly solid openings (except in 3rd). Should one increase the requirements slightly for a 2/1 bid if playing 2/1 forcing to 2NT, or just grin and bear the misfitting 21 counts that end up in 2NT-2? ahydra Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilKing Posted March 19, 2013 Report Share Posted March 19, 2013 I notice people talking about 2/1 forcing to 2NT. That's probably not a bad idea, and probably quite workable given my partner and I play fairly solid openings (except in 3rd). Should one increase the requirements slightly for a 2/1 bid if playing 2/1 forcing to 2NT, or just grin and bear the misfitting 21 counts that end up in 2NT-2? ahydra It's a bad idea in Acol, for the reason Helene_t gave - it puts too much strain on the 1NT response. Opener should not have to worry about missing game by passing a balanced 16. If you play strong 2/1, opener will be forced to raise 1NT to 2NT with a potential combined 22, which just haemorrhages equity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zelandakh Posted March 20, 2013 Report Share Posted March 20, 2013 I disagree Phil. There is nothing wrong with 2/1 being 10+ in Acol. It is an idea that has been put forward by many respected authors, with varying levels of force to follow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ahydra Posted March 20, 2013 Author Report Share Posted March 20, 2013 I disagree Phil. There is nothing wrong with 2/1 being 10+ in Acol. It is an idea that has been put forward by many respected authors, with varying levels of force to follow. 10+ yes; I think Phil was replying to my question about it being 11+. I guess if you're going to make it 11+ then you might as well go the whole hog and play 2/1 GF. ahydra Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
campboy Posted March 20, 2013 Report Share Posted March 20, 2013 It's perhaps worth saying that choosing a response on this hand in Acol is not (just) a matter of whether you are strong enough to bid 2♣. You shouldn't normally bypass hearts unless you are strong enough to force to game (by bidding both suits), since otherwise you may miss a heart fit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts