jillybean Posted July 29, 2013 Report Share Posted July 29, 2013 A lesson for me "trust your partner" [hv=pc=n&s=s63haj3dkq7532cq2&w=s9hk872djcakt9853&n=skqt74h95da864c64&e=saj852hqt64dt9cj7&d=s&v=n&b=15&a=1d2cdp2dpp3cpp3dppp]399|300[/hv] Lead A♣ tricks = 9 Other table: 1D 2C X P2D 2H 2S 3H 3S 4H 4S X tricks = 6 -18imp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtK78 Posted July 29, 2013 Report Share Posted July 29, 2013 I am having nightmares about this hand. With my negative double followed by 2♠, I showed a constructive hand not good enough to bid 2♠ directly over 2♣. Given that, my partner's 3♠ bid on two small spades is truly strange. I had quite a different picture of his hand than what came down in the dummy. Something like AJx of spades, KQxxxx of diamonds, 3-1 in the other suits or maybe a rounded suit A would have been nice. The only way I could have shown diamond support would have been to ignore my spade suit. The opps made the auction more difficult for me. But I just don't understand the 3♠ bid. Perhaps my 2♠ bid was too aggressive. But it didn't have to result in anything as silly as the actual result. -1700 is embarrassing. EDIT: My partner is of the opinion that I should never have introduced the spade suit, and that I should have bid 3♦ over 2♥. He also thought that his 3♠ bid was competitive, not invitational. I leave these comments to stand on their own merit, whether you choose to agree or disagree with them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lycier Posted July 31, 2013 Report Share Posted July 31, 2013 [hv=pc=n&s=s63haj3dkq7532cq2&w=s9hk872djcakt9853&n=skqt74h95da864c64&e=saj852hqt64dt9cj7&d=s&v=n&b=15&a=1d2cdp2dpp3cpp3dppp]399|300[/hv] after double,I think that it was best for the west bid 2♥ was a non-forcing bid to show 4-6 distribution . 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jillybean Posted July 31, 2013 Author Report Share Posted July 31, 2013 after double,I think that it was best for the west bid 2♥ was a non-forcing bid to show 4-6 distribution .2♥ would show a much stronger hand for us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c_corgi Posted July 31, 2013 Report Share Posted July 31, 2013 With the North hand I would fit jump over 2C. I would prefer a stronger hand, especially since it would set up a forcing pass at this vulnerability, but it seems worth it to get the whole hand off my chest in one go. Other routes are not attractive either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quiddity Posted July 31, 2013 Report Share Posted July 31, 2013 EDIT: My partner is of the opinion that I should never have introduced the spade suit, and that I should have bid 3♦ over 2♥. He also thought that his 3♠ bid was competitive, not invitational. I leave these comments to stand on their own merit, whether you choose to agree or disagree with them.[/size][/font] Tough hand. I guess Versace passed in a similar spot so that's one vote for not showing the spade suit. Still, as you point out, you could have a double fit and roll 4♠. Partner's 3♠ bid is terrible. At table one I might have redoubled with the East hand to show tolerance/values, though it is a bit light. I'd probably bid with West over 2♦ - 7-4 bid some more. It just seems wrong to pass out 2♦ with a nice 7-card club suit. And having passed the first round as East I would reopen with double - why ignore the majors? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted July 31, 2013 Report Share Posted July 31, 2013 I am having nightmares about this hand. With my negative double followed by 2♠, I showed a constructive hand not good enough to bid 2♠ directly over 2♣. Given that, my partner's 3♠ bid on two small spades is truly strange. I had quite a different picture of his hand than what came down in the dummy. Something like AJx of spades, KQxxxx of diamonds, 3-1 in the other suits or maybe a rounded suit A would have been nice. The only way I could have shown diamond support would have been to ignore my spade suit. The opps made the auction more difficult for me. But I just don't understand the 3♠ bid. Perhaps my 2♠ bid was too aggressive. But it didn't have to result in anything as silly as the actual result. -1700 is embarrassing. EDIT: My partner is of the opinion that I should never have introduced the spade suit, and that I should have bid 3♦ over 2♥. He also thought that his 3♠ bid was competitive, not invitational. I leave these comments to stand on their own merit, whether you choose to agree or disagree with them. a good discussion hand to have....do you show the spade suit or not and if so how? I might just bid 2d over 2c but again a good discussion hand. A question I would think about is playing NFB at unfav vul can we bid 2s here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted August 1, 2013 Report Share Posted August 1, 2013 3♠ is competitive but its a poor bid IMO. 2♠ shows a 6 card suit or an excellent 5 card one, this means that bidding spades again was a bad idea, bad idea if you were in the pass out seat, being on the live seat with partner still to act was a suicide, and playing him for an automatic 4♠ bid, pehaps the round before was lazy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtK78 Posted August 1, 2013 Report Share Posted August 1, 2013 3♠ is competitive but its a poor bid IMO. 2♠ shows a 6 card suit or an excellent 5 card one, this means that bidding spades again was a bad idea, bad idea if you were in the pass out seat, being on the live seat with partner still to act was a suicide, and playing him for an automatic 4♠ bid, pehaps the round before was lazy.I don't quite get your point. Which bids are you criticizing? 2♠, 3♠ or 4♠? 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.