phoenix214 Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 Scoring - IMP pairsNV vs VUL you deal and openYou have:♠:AKJ8♥:AKQ♦:J975♣:K8You open 2NT:Partner bids 3♥ - standard transfer.What do you do now?(Your pair does not have any relevant agreements over this, anything besides 3♠, should be a super accept by common sense)Relevant information: 4♥ would be a transfer to spades as well. 3♥-3♠, then 4♠ invites slam by pd. Most of the field play a strong club, and not neceserally have 2NT for a natural opener. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyberyeti Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 What's the range of my 2N, am I min or max ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suokko Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 "No agreements" what ever I bid is going to be pure guess if partner thinks samy way. So I will avoid any confusion and just bid 4♠. But actually that hand would like to hear if partner has a mild slam interest and short ♦. That why it would be nice to have 3NT as super accept asking for SGL if slam is possible. Other wise partner would bid retransfer to play 4♠ (or ask aces without show shortness). But more often 2NT opening includes mix of values that doesn't work so perfectly against any shortness. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 3s no super accept over 2nt openings If pard now bids 4s as a slam try I will cue 5cpartner must have minor suit cards to even make a mild slam try. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtK78 Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 4♠ seems clear. Opposite 5 spades, a doubleton diamond and a zero count, I have play. If partner has a good hand, I want him to know that I have a slam suitable hand. He knows I have a good hand, but he is also looking at nothing in hearts and a trump suit that is at best Q high. I want to encourage him to bid on if he has something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1eyedjack Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 To those suggesting 3NT asking for shortage, it is not free of risk but I tend to play 2N-3H-3N to show a 2-5-3-3 shape. Yes, breaking the rule that you need a fit to super-accept. The risk of course is that if partner was about to drop the transfer accepted at the 3 level, you are now a level higher. The risk of NOT doing it is that you miss the potential for finding the Heart fit on the rather more frequent occasions that partner was going to bid again. Over a transfer to Hearts we play 2N-3D-3S to show a 5-2-3-3 shape. This carries slightly lower risk because 3S has a respectable chance of being a playable spot opposite a weak takeout into Hearts. Whatever, some (system) bid higher than 3S is indicated here.Presumably not 4H, as that would deny partner a re-transfer. Other than that I am easy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve2005 Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 Without any special agreements 4♠ is your only clear super-accept. Besides anything else may wrong side contract. At imps I'll risk p having 0 cause if they have anything will make 4♠ and otherwise could be playing in 3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix214 Posted May 26, 2015 Author Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 Edit 2NT is 20-22, somehow i figured i posted that, my mistake Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasetb Posted May 27, 2015 Report Share Posted May 27, 2015 I bid 3♠. We have the expected number of controls (7) and HCP (21) . While we have 4-card support (and 3 honors at that), we could easily have matching losers in Diamonds and Clubs unless partner has something. And if partner has anything and makes a move toward slam, I will happily oblige. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilG007 Posted May 27, 2015 Report Share Posted May 27, 2015 Scoring - IMP pairsNV vs VUL you deal and openYou have:♠:AKJ8♥:AKQ♦:J975♣:K8You open 2NT:Partner bids 3♥ - standard transfer.What do you do now?(Your pair does not have any relevant agreements over this, anything besides 3♠, should be a super accept by common sense)Relevant information: 4♥ would be a transfer to spades as well. 3♥-3♠, then 4♠ invites slam by pd. Most of the field play a strong club, and not neceserally have 2NT for a natural opener. For the present,you should just bid 3 ♠]as requested. Partner could have a yarborough with 5+ rag spades and is asking for a takeout. Make the minimum bid and leave the decision to go further to partner. Bid your own hand,not your partners <_< Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted May 27, 2015 Report Share Posted May 27, 2015 I don't get all of this pard is bidding with 5s and zero points... come on guys....pard is allowed to pass 2nt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilG007 Posted May 27, 2015 Report Share Posted May 27, 2015 I don't get all of this pard is bidding with 5s and zero points... come on guys....pard is allowed to pass 2ntOf course he is....but he chose instead to bid 3♥asking for a transfer to♠You shouldn't be second guessing partner..just do what you've been asked,go with the flow,and leave the next bid(if any)to 'pard' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1eyedjack Posted May 27, 2015 Report Share Posted May 27, 2015 It is unusual for 2N opener to have a 3 point range, there being no room to invite, although some of the older styles did advocate that. But that lack of bidding space amplifies the need to use what little space is available to maximum effect, and I know of several good partnerships who will superaccept with only 3 trumps if the hand is otherwise suitable. Not for no reason is the 2N opener dubbed the slam-killer. The difference in playing strength between this hand and one with the black suits reversed is so great that both your game and slam bidding can only improve by distinguishing between the two as early as possible. he chose instead to bid 3♥asking for a transfer to♠ unless you have too good a hand in contextFYP You shouldn't be second guessing partner.. No, let's instead be unhelpful and ask partner to do the second guessing. just do what you've been asked,Agreed. You have been asked to superaccept with a particularly good hand in context, so do what you have been asked. go with the flow, If by going with the flow you judge it right to bid with the room, then that is not really possible as the OP states that most of the room is opening a strong 1C rather than 2N. I suppose it could go 1C-1D-2N-3H at the other tables, leaving you in the same position. But in a more general event this strategy would dictate super-accepting, being the majority action. But if you need a swing, perhaps just accept. and leave the next bid(if any)to 'pard'Pard is always left with the next bid (unless you pass 3H :)) One call that he might make is pass. And 3S may indeed be high enough if partner has a flat Yarborough. Just as 2S might be enough after a 2-level transfer, and yet super-accepting is mainstream. Of course partner can also pass 3S when you are making 4 in comfort. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akwoo Posted May 27, 2015 Report Share Posted May 27, 2015 I bid 3N, which I don't take as asking for shortage, but as a super-accept showing 4♠ while suggesting 3N as the final contract. (Maybe I should say it is asking for shortage but can be passed with none.) If partner has no shortage, 3N could very well play better than 4♠; for example ♠Qxxxx ♥xx ♦Txx ♣xxx is much better at 3N, while ♠Qxxxx ♥xxx ♦Tx ♣xxx is basically equal. At MPs or a short IMP team game I would certainly consider 3♠. I expect partner to bid on with any ace or king (the latter only because he or she has a 5 card suit). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted May 27, 2015 Report Share Posted May 27, 2015 guys many do not play super accept over 2ntpls do not assume such unless you know I took the chance that we do not and it will not kill us...It may help us I see the vast of you assume other and worry about missing game Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1eyedjack Posted May 27, 2015 Report Share Posted May 27, 2015 14 votes (to date) is of course not a representative sample. But the proportion of 10:4 in favour of moving is roughly in line with my experience of popularity of super-accepting in principle in real life. At least among the better pairs. And that leaves plenty of room for consistency with your statement that "many do not super accept over 2nt". It is also my observation that the dogmatic acceptance of transfers is skewed toward the less experienced pairs (and yes, I accept that some good pairs do it also). To be frank if the arguments for accepting in this case were that the hand falls just short of qualification (say you would prefer the Club King to be Diamond King) then I would have more sympathy. But a blanket refusal ever to super-accept over 2N is in my experience contrary to mainstream practice, even if many do it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gszes Posted May 27, 2015 Report Share Posted May 27, 2015 3s Even with 4 trumps I do not consider this hand a super accept. The SJ and DJ are highly overrated and even the possibility of a club ruff is minimized opposite a known 5 card spade suit. Yes I have 4 trumps and 21 HCP but GAME is not such a hot prospect opposite a vast majority of hands p was going to pass with over the transfer. The idea of a super accept is when one's hand has exceeded the original range or is of exceptional value after hearing the transfer. IMHO this hand meets neither of these criteria. FWIW I also like to use 3n as asking for shortness but only with hands I will super accept with. 4C and 4D are super accepts with a side 5 card minor that do not meet the use of 3n. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyberyeti Posted May 27, 2015 Report Share Posted May 27, 2015 3s Even with 4 trumps I do not consider this hand a super accept. The SJ and DJ are highly overrated and even the possibility of a club ruff is minimized opposite a known 5 card spade suit. Yes I have 4 trumps and 21 HCP but GAME is not such a hot prospect opposite a vast majority of hands p was going to pass with over the transfer. The idea of a super accept is when one's hand has exceeded the original range or is of exceptional value after hearing the transfer. IMHO this hand meets neither of these criteria. FWIW I also like to use 3n as asking for shortness but only with hands I will super accept with. 4C and 4D are super accepts with a side 5 card minor that do not meet the use of 3n. The issue is partly what you expect partner to bid on with. Qxxxx, xxx, xx, Qxx ? Most of the time, this will not make game opposite a 2N opener (50%+ of 20-22s are 20s IIRC), the knowledge that you will break the transfer makes it easy to transfer then pass opposite a non break, can be wrong but I think your odds of being in the right place significantly improve if you break on the original hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted May 27, 2015 Report Share Posted May 27, 2015 As others have said, this hand is deceptively poor. Our long suit is J9xx. AKQ tight is a devaluation. The spade J is questionable, and even the K really isn't pulling its full weight in a five, much less a six card fit. Aside from this, the four trump are nice, and we do have a ruffing value. I would just bid 3♠, but cooperate if partner starts making noise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gszes Posted May 27, 2015 Report Share Posted May 27, 2015 The issue is partly what you expect partner to bid on with. Qxxxx, xxx, xx, Qxx ? Most of the time, this will not make game opposite a 2N opener (50%+ of 20-22s are 20s IIRC), the knowledge that you will break the transfer makes it easy to transfer then pass opposite a non break, can be wrong but I think your odds of being in the right place significantly improve if you break on the original hand. It seems too unilateral for one to decide to let 3s ride when 3n could more than easily be right. This hand which is right near the top of the weak hands p might hold and decide to pass 3s with is one that might fall through the cracks. I never claimed 3s was a cure all just that it rated to be right quite a lot opposite a hand p intended to pass 3s with. A stronger case can be made for raising to 4s vul at imps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nige1 Posted May 28, 2015 Report Share Posted May 28, 2015 Scoring - IMP pairs. NV vs VUL you deal. You have:♠ A K J 8 ♥ A K Q ♦ J 9 7 5 ♣ K 8You open 2NT: Partner bids 3♥ - standard transfer. What do you do now?(Your pair does not have any relevant agreements over this, anything besides 3♠, should be a super accept by common sense)Relevant information: 4♥ would be a transfer to spades as well. 3♥-3♠, then 4♠ invites slam by pd. Most of the field play a strong club, and not neceserally have 2NT for a natural opener. IMO 3N = 10. 4♣ = 9. 4♠ = 8. 3♠ (Intending to bid 4♣ over 3N and otherwise investigate slam) = 8. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vampyr Posted May 28, 2015 Report Share Posted May 28, 2015 14 votes (to date) is of course not a representative sample. But the proportion of 10:4 in favour of moving is roughly in line with my experience of popularity of super-accepting in principle in real life. It is too bad there is not the option of "not 3♠". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted May 28, 2015 Report Share Posted May 28, 2015 It is too bad there is not the option of "not 3♠".The option of "not 3♠" is currently leading 16-10. At the table, I would suspect 3♠ to gain (from allowing partner's intended rebid to happen), gain if partner passes and we don't have game, and lose if we score up 170. That seems +< ev for those 10 people when they are playing against the other 16... and probably +< ev versus the others as well since I think my partner's judgement about when to xfer to 3S and pass might be better than theirs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vampyr Posted May 28, 2015 Report Share Posted May 28, 2015 The option of "not 3♠" is currently leading 16-10. But many people may not have voted because if the didn't bid 3♠, what they would bid would demand on whom they were playing with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trinidad Posted May 29, 2015 Report Share Posted May 29, 2015 At MPs, I would bid 3♠, but at IMPs (and this is IMPs) I would make sure we get to 4♠. Rik 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.