Jump to content

Judgement check


jallerton

Bid slam or not?  

40 members have voted

  1. 1. What is your view?

    • It's clear to bid slam
    • It's clear to pass
    • It's close. I might pass or bid slam.


Recommended Posts

I dunno Beavis? Why did I bid 4? How can anyone make sense of a nonsense auction? Now, if I had somehow managed to bid 5 over 4, then 5 would have been a signoff.

 

I'm guessing you didn't bother to read the description of the auction as given in the OP?

 

Opener's 3S bid showed spade values and some interest playing diamonds. It says nothing about control of spades.

Opener's 4S bid is showing 1st or 2nd round control of spades. Bypassing 4S would presumably have denied control of spades.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm guessing you didn't bother to read the description of the auction as given in the OP?

 

Opener's 3S bid showed spade values and some interest playing diamonds. It says nothing about control of spades.

Opener's 4S bid is showing 1st or 2nd round control of spades. Bypassing 4S would presumably have denied control of spades.

By golly you are right. The OP by his own admission does not know how to bid. "Spade values" my Aunt Fanny. 3 shows a control (probably the ace). It denies a control. It confirms support. It says the hand is not dreck for slam purposes. That is just basic bridge.

 

In any event, South started with 1NT, a limit bid. This means the unlimited hand, North, is in control. South told his story as best he was capable. 5 is game and as such satisfies the initial agreement established by the 3 response. Bidding on over 5 is bizarre.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By golly you are right. The OP by his own admission does not know how to bid. "Spade values" my Aunt Fanny. 3 shows a control (probably the ace). It denies a control. It confirms support.

 

Well then I guess I also don't know the basics of bridge. I would definitely bid 3 with QJT xx KJx AKQxx. And since when basics of bridge changed and cuebids below 3 NT showing a control for slam and possibly an Ace by your definition?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well then I guess I also don't know the basics of bridge. I would definitely bid 3 with QJT xx KJx AKQxx. And since when basics of bridge changed and cuebids below 3 NT showing a control for slam and possibly an Ace by your definition?

The point is that you don't want to waste the rest of the three level with a pointless bid. The hand you gave is a nice 4 call assuming you are playing 15-17 HCP one NT opener. You would confirm support, deny a or control and show a control and a hand not dreck for slam.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...