awm Posted July 23, 2015 Report Share Posted July 23, 2015 Hopefully a simple question, basically standard methods. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sty2000 Posted July 23, 2015 Report Share Posted July 23, 2015 Can you please write the bidding sequence using parentheses around opponents' bids? When it's written this way it's impossible to answer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mbodell Posted July 23, 2015 Report Share Posted July 23, 2015 Can you please write the bidding sequence using parentheses around opponents' bids? When it's written this way it's impossible to answer. I think it is 1♣ - (1♦) - 1♠ - (2♠) - X Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the_clown Posted July 23, 2015 Report Share Posted July 23, 2015 Spade fit, not good enough to bid 3♠. Normally 3 cards, but I guess you can construct some hands with 4 card support 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P_Marlowe Posted July 23, 2015 Report Share Posted July 23, 2015 Assuming the auction is the way MBodell wrote: Lead director, showing a top honor. With kind regardsMarlowe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apollo1201 Posted July 23, 2015 Report Share Posted July 23, 2015 Rather than 3 cd and extra values, I would also add non-minimal hand (do you consider a prime 13 count eg Axx Axxx x KQTxx as extra values?). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finch Posted July 23, 2015 Report Share Posted July 23, 2015 "I would have bid that"Usually 3 spades, but could be a poor hand with 4 I would like to have a top spade honour, but that won't always stop me doubling if I haven't. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveMoe Posted July 24, 2015 Report Share Posted July 24, 2015 Should focus on either ♠Ax or ♠Kx (more length possible) but primary message is I have a control in your suit. Should indicate a desire to avoid 3♠ preemptive, so stronger hands are not ruled out. 2♠ is forcing right? Definitely not any simple 3-card raise as that is now anti-law. Big Inv/GF fits have 3♦ at their disposal not Double. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted July 24, 2015 Report Share Posted July 24, 2015 "I would have bid that"Usually 3 spades, but could be a poor hand with 4 I would like to have a top spade honour, but that won't always stop me doubling if I haven't.I think it should also include hands with 3-card support which would have been too good for 2♠. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr1303 Posted July 30, 2015 Report Share Posted July 30, 2015 What Frances said. Weak NTs with 4 spades or anything not terrible with 3 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.