Bbradley62 Posted October 24, 2014 Report Share Posted October 24, 2014 GIB and I had the following auction:2♣-2♦ (strong - waiting)2♠-3♦ (both natural)4N-5C (RKC(D) - 0 or 3) I was holding 8 top spades, 2 round Aces and 3 small diamonds. Maybe that wasn't the best way to bid this, but that's what I did, (probably foolishly) eager to check the possibility of bidding grand. Now, I wanted to sign off in 5♠, but when I previewed that bid, it was Q ask. It didn't occur to me to preview 5♥ -- would that have been to sign off in 5♠? There shouldn't be a need for two Q asks... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephen Tu Posted October 24, 2014 Report Share Posted October 24, 2014 Well it thinks you agreed diamonds. If you wanted to RKC for spades you should have rebid spades first. Or started with 3s over 2d which likely would have been best. With my partners I generally don't like 4nt = RKC in last bid suit if there is a way to agree trumps below game, e.g. here 4♦, I would probably play 4nt as simply "too good for 3nt". But I guess RKC for diamonds isn't totally ridiculous. I agree if 4n = rkc diamonds 5h should be the queen ask, 5s who knows, to play is OK but maybe it should be asking for SK looking for the diamond grand? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bbradley62 Posted October 25, 2014 Author Report Share Posted October 25, 2014 Given my hand, I definitely wanted to bid RKC for diamonds, since that would address all of my uncovered cards... I failed to plan for the possibility of the unfavorable response. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1eyedjack Posted October 25, 2014 Report Share Posted October 25, 2014 Yes it is fairly common with an intelligent partner to RKC in one suit expecting to settle in another. I would never have tried that with GIB, except as an experiment to generate a forum post :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trinidad Posted October 25, 2014 Report Share Posted October 25, 2014 Seems like a nice example in favor of kickback or minorwood. :) Rik Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve2005 Posted November 2, 2014 Report Share Posted November 2, 2014 Seems like a nice example in favor of kickback or minorwood. :) RikStill have to had agreed trump, bidding 4N or Kickback before agreeing trump is premature.But Kickback better. Minorwood using 4♣/4♦ as ace ask is just an accident waiting to happen (being mistaken for sign-off/inv or forcing bid) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasetb Posted November 3, 2014 Report Share Posted November 3, 2014 You should have just bid 6♠, hoping that partner had the nuts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bbradley62 Posted November 3, 2014 Author Report Share Posted November 3, 2014 You should have just bid 6♠, hoping that partner had the nuts.Before or after I found out that we were missing the cashable ♦AK? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnu Posted November 3, 2014 Report Share Posted November 3, 2014 So, did GIB let you play in spades below the 7 level??? :lol: Also, you show 2♦ (strong - waiting). Isn't is just waiting, could be weak? I think the GIB "system" bid after opening 2♣ is to jump to 3♠ showing a solid, independent suit and about 10 playing tricks. Maybe GIB partner could do something good in the bidding :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bbradley62 Posted November 3, 2014 Author Report Share Posted November 3, 2014 Also, you show 2♦ (strong - waiting). Isn't is just waiting, could be weak?Sorry if that was unclear. "2♣-2♦ (strong - waiting)" means 2♣ is strong and 2♦ is waiting". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lovera Posted May 1, 2015 Report Share Posted May 1, 2015 Well it thinks you agreed diamonds. If you wanted to RKC for spades you should have rebid spades first. Or started with 3s over 2d which likely would have been best. With my partners I generally don't like 4nt = RKC in last bid suit if there is a way to agree trumps below game, e.g. here 4♦, I would probably play 4nt as simply "too good for 3nt". But I guess RKC for diamonds isn't totally ridiculous. I agree if 4n = rkc diamonds 5h should be the queen ask, 5s who knows, to play is OK but maybe it should be asking for SK looking for the diamond grand?If you want to know If in spade suit there is K it's sufficent 5♥=? for Q-5♠=yes Q+K of spade.(Lovera) 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.