lycier Posted October 20, 2015 Report Share Posted October 20, 2015 This hand is from 2015Cavendish Monaco - qualication R6/7,Mossop Vs Diamond. Closed room: South：John HurdNorth：Vincent DemuyWes：Jason HackettEast：Justin Hackett [hv=http://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?sn= HURD&s=S6432HA5DT932CT65&wn=JA HACKETT&w=SKQJ7HKT8762DQCK4&nn=DEMUY&n=SAHJ4DAKJ76CAQJ98&en=JU HACKETT&e=ST985HQ93D854C732&d=n&v=n&b=21&a=1DP1S2H4CP4SPPP&p=H7H4HQH5H9HAH2HJCTCKCAC2CQC3C5C4CJC7C6SQHKD6H3S2DTDQDAD4DKD5D2SJS7SAS5S3&c=10]400|300[/hv] Result：4♠S-4The bridge textbbok said :after partner responds,and following opp overcall,then opener jump new suit is a real suit and forcing to game.4♣ is really difficult to understand? Is 4♣ a complicated problem? Open Room,for reference,only. South：David MossopNorth：Paul D HackettWest：John DiamondEast：Brain Platnick[hv=http://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?sn=MOSSOP&s=S6432HA5DT932CT65&wn=DIAMOND&w=SKQJ7HKT8762DQCK4&nn=P HACKETT&n=SAHJ4DAKJ76CAQJ98&en=PLATNICK&e=ST985HQ93D854C732&d=n&v=n&b=21&a=1DPP1H3CP3DPPP&p=H3HAH6H4D2DQDAD4DKD5D3H7D6D8D9H8CTCK&c=13]400|300[/hv] Result：3♦N+4 Is this a very difficult hand? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billw55 Posted October 20, 2015 Report Share Posted October 20, 2015 Yes, bidding accidents happen even at the top level. No, they aren't using a bidding system from your textbook. Not sure what else your point is. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gszes Posted October 21, 2015 Report Share Posted October 21, 2015 If everyone played the same system and drew the same conclusions noone would play this game. It is the rich environmentof change and difference of opinion that make this game enjoyable. I do not understand either table's bidding but Ialso have not one clue what their overall approach is. One pair playing in 4s shows how important it is to be on the same page. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wank Posted October 21, 2015 Report Share Posted October 21, 2015 they're all difficult hands if the auction involves a jump in a new suit when you don't have an agreement on what it means. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted October 21, 2015 Report Share Posted October 21, 2015 Agreement or not I don't think Mossop is proud of his bidding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wank Posted October 21, 2015 Report Share Posted October 21, 2015 Agreement or not I don't think Mossop is proud of his bidding. shhh that's my partner for the pairs ;-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhm Posted October 21, 2015 Report Share Posted October 21, 2015 Misunderstanding is not a synonym for difficult, neither is misjudgement. Rainer Herrmann Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted October 21, 2015 Report Share Posted October 21, 2015 The open room auction is reasonable IMO. The closed room auction is a bit surprising for a pair that plays in the Cavendish. But it is hardly a unique example. It is difficult to make agreements for everything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil_20686 Posted October 21, 2015 Report Share Posted October 21, 2015 Its quite common in these situations, if you havent discussed ad infinitum, that a new suit at the 3 level is GF, or at the very least forcing 1. I guess that is what Hurd thought they were playing, then a 4C bid can only be a splinter for spades since any natural hand with clubs can bid 3C. In fact that is probably what mossop thought too, and thus that his 3D bid was forcing, as it would be after 1d-1M-3C for most people. 3D is a huge underbid if you think the north hand is typical, and obviously north did or he would have bid more. Its pretty clear that both pairs had misunderstandings about either whether bids were forcing or what strength they were showing. It happens. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdano Posted October 21, 2015 Report Share Posted October 21, 2015 Phil, did you misread the second auction? I don't think there is a logical explanation for 3D, having passed over 1D. I think it was just a silly mistake, #$ happens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billw55 Posted October 21, 2015 Report Share Posted October 21, 2015 Phil, did you misread the second auction? I don't think there is a logical explanation for 3D, having passed over 1D. I think it was just a silly mistake, #$ happens.Phil's theory was only that Mossop might have thought 3♣ was a game force, and hence that 3♦ was unconditionally forcing. Perhaps it could even show some strength in a fast arrival context? Maybe that theory does not make sense at expert level; but it is definitely clear in Phil's post what he meant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil_20686 Posted October 21, 2015 Report Share Posted October 21, 2015 Phil's theory was only that Mossop might have thought 3♣ was a game force, and hence that 3♦ was unconditionally forcing. Perhaps it could even show some strength in a fast arrival context? Maybe that theory does not make sense at expert level; but it is definitely clear in Phil's post what he meant. Yes I was guessing that Mossop thought they were in a GF, in which case 3d makes perfect sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdano Posted October 21, 2015 Report Share Posted October 21, 2015 Normally, a non-2C opener can never create a game force opposite hand that cannot respond at the one level. I have never heard anyone play otherwise. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gordontd Posted October 21, 2015 Report Share Posted October 21, 2015 Normally, a non-2C opener can never create a game force opposite hand that cannot respond at the one level. I have never heard anyone play otherwise.I think they can, but only by cue-bidding the opponents' suit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billw55 Posted October 21, 2015 Report Share Posted October 21, 2015 Normally, a non-2C opener can never create a game force opposite hand that cannot respond at the one level. I have never heard anyone play otherwise.Seems so, but is that 100%? I know we talk about opening some pretty strong hands at the one level when two suited, because this can be hard to describe after a forcing opening. Anyway, ruling that out, the possibilities seem to be: 1. Mossop thought 3♦ was forcing for some other reason2. He undervalued his hand in context3. He had a slip of attention Yes, perhaps #3 is most plausible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted October 23, 2015 Report Share Posted October 23, 2015 Blame that diabolical 2H overcall! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveMoe Posted October 25, 2015 Report Share Posted October 25, 2015 Yes, a very difficult hand to look at. I'll bet Hurd and Demuy can't unsee this one. But then again, being able to forget when these hands occur is a valuable skill. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted October 25, 2015 Report Share Posted October 25, 2015 Yes I was guessing that Mossop thought they were in a GF, in which case 3d makes perfect sense. I disagree Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lycier Posted October 26, 2015 Author Report Share Posted October 26, 2015 Yes, bidding accidents happen even at the top level. No, they aren't using a bidding system from your textbook. Not sure what else your point is. Seems so, but is that 100%? I know we talk about opening some pretty strong hands at the one level when two suited, because this can be hard to describe after a forcing opening. Anyway, ruling that out, the possibilities seem to be: 1. Mossop thought 3♦ was forcing for some other reason2. He undervalued his hand in context3. He had a slip of attention Yes, perhaps #3 is most plausible. Now here,please allow me to make a list of logical analysis and reasoning. Hand-1[hv=d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1dp1hp3cp?]133|100[/hv]Generally,3♣ usually is a forcing bid with GF.If not,what else? Hand-2[hv=d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1dp1h1s3cp?]133|100[/hv] Same hands,is there no way for jump 3♣ to show GF strength because of overcalling 1♠? When without interference,opener jump new suit is GF,don't lost the original meaning because of with interference,if not what else? Hand-3[hv=d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1dp1h1s4cp?]133|100[/hv] What's double jump 4♣? 1- Only for splinter raise in 19+values hand,does opener throw out both of rooms of 2 level and 3 level ? a very luxurious life? How to apply himself to Useful Space Principle?2- Now, there is one reason for opener to use up too much useful space,that's just a limted raise with from good 13hcp to 17hcp or so.If not,what else? Hand-4[hv=d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1dp1s2h4cp?]133|100[/hv] After overcalled 2♠,we know that opener's rebid-3♣ is not forcing,only for preference,let responder pick up a minor suit.If defined 4♣ as a splinter raise,now how to show strong hand with 5-5 minors? how to creat a sequence of game forcing clearly?If 4♣ is not a forcing natural suit? what else? Even top players,there are some basic issue remains undiscussed,there are same misunderstandings happened.I believe that the bridge is probability game in the parallel world,No one be always right, no one do make no mistake and no misunderstanding in this world. ( Excuse me for my Chinglish) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephen Tu Posted October 26, 2015 Report Share Posted October 26, 2015 None of your examples really have any relationship to the 2nd problem presented. Because in your examples, responder bids something, doesn't pass the opening bid. On the 2nd one, south really just fell asleep. Maybe he thought 3d was forcing for some reason, forgetting that he had passed originally. It's pretty clear if you are awake to bid at least 4d with an ace and 4 cd support. On the 1st one, you don't know their entire system. It's possible they are playing some sort of artificial forcing 2nt bid in that spot, so responder thought 4c was splinter and hands this good with clubs go through 2nt. While opener thought differently. These kind of things can happen when playing lots of fancy gadgets with a non-primary partner. I doubt say Hurd playing with Wooldridge would have same accident on this auction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted October 27, 2015 Report Share Posted October 27, 2015 I have an agreement: When opps show a suit we only splinter that suit or none. Seems to solve many problems. 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.