6250

[Zelandakh]

I saw this hand and wondered what the views would be of the gallery here. I am sure some of you will recognise it but if you do please do not give spoilers until everyone has had a chance to answer.

 

[hv=pc=n&w=sq97654h92daq965c&d=e&v=b&b=10&a=p1h]133|200[/hv]

 

You are playing Teams and estimate that the match is slightly against you. It is Game All and partner as dealer passes. Your base system is Stone Age Precision so partner might have a balanced 12 count but will open some minimal unbalanced hands that might be passed in 2/1. What is your plan after RHO opens 1♥ and how clear do you find the action?

[Zelandakh]

Only 5 votes and no replies is a little disappointing. Is it that everyone else thinks the answer is too obvious to bother or just that everyone has seen the hand and is holding off answering for that reason? At the time of watching, there was some considerable debate on the correct call with this hand.

[billw55]

OK Zel, I added votes and response just for you :)

 

Although I dont actually have much to say other than my votes :(

[Zelandakh]

Thank you Bill. I will give you an upvote for the effort. :)

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

I think 2H is reasonable.

The 6th spade gets bal. by the suit quality of the side suit.

 

I dont mind 1S / 2S, but 2H is certainly ok, or even obvious,

choosing an alternative would be based on tactical considerations.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[MrAce]

I would have bid 2♥ myself.. I would live at least one of the other choices w/o strong opposition.

 

Zel, the reason of less replies is the way poll was arranged.

 

Poll allows us to vote what we think is right and on second poll it allows us to tell how tolerated or confident we are with our decision. This causes ;

 

a-People feel by voting they already said what they think about this auction and nothing further to add.

 

b-People remain cautious and don't vote because once they decide to vote, they will have to engage with one of the following statements in 2nd part.

[Zelandakh]

Thamks Timo, that might be true. I have added a "none of the above/no comment" option. That will allow contributors to answer the first question without the second.

[nigel_k]

I chose 1♠ and would not use Michaels with 6-5 unless there was a large difference in suit quality.

 

Not a factor in my choice under these conditions, but I don't believe it's worth using Michaels vulnerable with a weak hand at all and would just play it as intermediate or better.

[awm]

2S for me. In comparison, 2H takes up less space, is much easier to penalize, and will fairly often propel me to the wrong fit. The 2H bid also potentially helps opponents a lot in the play if they reach game. For me this is not actually close although I know many people bid an auto 2H on these hands.

[mike777]

2h but I thought 2s a very close second option.

[mr1303]

Again, another vote for a close 2H, with both 1S and 2S being acceptable.

[Codo]

I would not bid Michaels with 6-5 but surely with 5-6 or 5-5.

[Zelandakh]

This hand came from a jec match. After jec's 1♥ opening, the opponent bid 2♥ and after a somewhat strange sequence West eventually played 3♠X, down 4 for -1100. The 2♥ call came in for particular criticism, especially from a Yellow who found it ridiculous (and 1♠ clear). Others said 2♥ was automatic and predicted the same result would be seen in the other room. Given how divided the opinions were I thought I would ask here both what the choice would be and how clear it is. At the other table the result was not repeated, since East (apron) was able to open a two-suited 2♥, playing there doubled for "only" 800. That translated to 7 IMPs for jec and the last chance for a comeback was lost.

[the hog]

2H. I do not understand the failure to use Michaels just because the suit is 6 in length. The suit quality is not that good.

What is ridiculous is the comment made by the yellow. Perhaps the yellow should learn to play bridge.

[BillPatch]

This hand came from a jec match. After jec's 1♥ opening, the opponent bid 2♥ and after a somewhat strange sequence West eventually played 3♠X, down 4 for -1100. The 2♥ call came in for particular criticism, especially from a Yellow who found it ridiculous (and 1♠ clear). Others said 2♥ was automatic and predicted the same result would be seen in the other room. Given how divided the opinions were I thought I would ask here both what the choice would be and how clear it is. At the other table the result was not repeated, since East (apron) was able to open a two-suited 2♥, playing there doubled for "only" 800. That translated to 7 IMPs for jec and the last chance for a comeback was lost.

Perhaps Jimmy Cayne is so well known that everyone else didn't need to google jec for his team? But who are the Yellows?

[Zelandakh]

Yellows are BBO staff and volunteers. On BBF you can recognise them because they have Group: Yellows or Group: Admin under their name in posts and because you cannot upvote their posts. As for the bridge qualities, it is my understanding that the Yellow that made the comments is amongst the best players in this category and therefore I am inclined to take what they write seriously, especially when they are so vehement in their position. FWiiW, noone mentioned Adam's 2♠ at all but this would probably have avoided the disaster too, since the spades divided 3-3 and it might have been difficult for Jimmy and Alfredo to get together for a penalty (but there is a reason why they are world class, so who knows?).

[CamHenry]

My "other option" is a direct 3♠, but then I overbid my overcalls.