Jump to content

From today's BBO/JEC


antonylee

Recommended Posts

[hv=pc=n&s=sq6hdqj764cak9863&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=2d(weak only multi)3c3h(p%2Fc)d(responsive)3s]133|200[/hv]

Agree with 3? What now?

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sqj98743ht87dacak&d=e&v=0&b=14&a=1c]133|200[/hv]

How many spades?

EDIT: If you choose 1, what's your general plan for the followups? Jump to 3/4? Compete at the lowest level?

 

[hv=pc=n&s=skt65hq7dj9876ck6&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1h2d]133|200[/hv]

Double? (what do you do over 3?) Trap pass? 2N?

 

[hv=pc=n&s=saj974h54dakqtca9&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=3c]133|200[/hv]

4 would be 5M5. Do you pretend you mis-sorted?

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sakqt96h4dkt7cq82&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=p1sp2s(wide%20ranging%20%5B6-9%5D)p]133|200[/hv]

Invite? (you can show shortness) Blast to game?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) I'll underbid with 4; it's not as much an underbid as if RHO passed.

2) I think 1 followed by 4 shows this hand.

3) I negative double, but I think 3 from partner shows extras

4) Double for me - I would bid 4 if one of my hearts was a club or vice versa.

5) I have a short suit invite; I use it. Without I might blast. I'm not sure what kinds of hands you're saving a short suit invite for if you're not using it here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hand 1 - 4n we can easily have slam

hand 2 - 1s seems normal enough

hand 3 - start with x - tricky over pd's 3c probably just punt 3n

hand 4 - 3s - feels like a bit of an underbid but meh

hand 5 - easiest one of the lot: 4s imo not bidding game on this hand vul at imps is terrible

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You might decide that this hand is too strong for a short suit invite (planning to respect partner's signoff) (see mike777's answer).

 

I understand that. But I'm having trouble figuring what hand one would think is the right strength for a short suit invite if you think this one is too strong. Just about every hand weaker than this I would consider too weak for a short suit invite!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[hv=pc=n&s=sq6hdqj764cak9863&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=2d(multi)3c3h(p%2Fc)d(responsive)3s]133|200|

Agree with 3? What now?

Over (2) ?? I rank

1. Pass = WAITING. Hoping to have a later opportunity to bid an UNT.

2. 3 = NAT

3. 3 = NAT To get both suits in the frame.

Over (3) ?? I rank

1. 4 = NAT (Partner's double of 3 is likely to be penalty).

2. 4N = ??? Ambiguous and an overbid.[/hv][hv=pc=n&s=sqj98743ht87dacak&d=e&v=0&b=14&a=1c]133|200|

How many spades? If you choose 1, what's your general plan for the followups? Jump to 3/4? Compete at the lowest level?

Over (1) ?? I rank

1. 1 = NAT.

2. 4 = PRE. Terence Reese would approve "A pre-empt, known to be weak, is a blunt sword"

3. 3 = JUMP CUE = Good hand good suit.

4. Double = T/O. Misdescriptive.

After overcalling 1, if you get another chance, I suppose you bid 4. [/hv][hv=pc=n&s=skt65hq7dj9876ck6&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1h2d]133|200|

Double? (what do you do over 3?) Trap pass? 2N?

Over (1 (2) ?? I rank

1. Double = NEG

2, Pass = TRAP,

3. 2N = NAT overbid.

Over 1 (2) Double (Pass) 3 (Pass) ?? I rank

1. 3 = NAT.

2. 3N = NAT.[/hv][hv=pc=n&s=saj974h54dakqtca9&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=3c]133|200|

4 would be 5M5. Do you pretend you mis-sorted?

Over (3) ?? I rank

1. 4 = ART. Michaels. Best compromise in cramped auction.

2. 3 = NAT. Underbid

3. Double = T/O. Misdescriptive.

4. 3N = NAT. But no stop.

5. 4 = NAT Misdescriptive overbid. [/hv][hv=pc=n&s=sakqt96h4dkt7cq82&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=p1sp2s(wide%20ranging%20%5B6-9%5D)p]133|200|

Invite? (you can show shortness) Blast to game?

I kibitzed the unlucky result on this hand at the other table. Over partner's 2, I rank

1. 3 = TRIAL. Don't like 3 = SPL (although it might work here) because it invites belated competition.

2. 4 = PRE. Meckstroth recommended blasting when you have 6+.

3. 3 = INV?/PRE?

4. Pass = NAT. Timorous,[/hv]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Having started with 3, 4 now seems easy enough. It is impossible to comment on whether this was the best route without knowing the defence being used. It would also be good if the description contained the proper definition as multi is insufficient.

2. 1 is clear. Follow-ups depends on what happens next, in particular whether we are in constructive or destructive mode.

3. Just about worth a double. 3 the next time around.

4. Double looks obvious with a strong flexible hand.

5. Unlike Roland, I find this one fairly close. If you can trust partner to bid game very aggressively then the trial might well be best but just bidding 4 is probably the right practical decision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Having started with 3, 4 now seems easy enough. It is impossible to comment on whether this was the best route without knowing the defence being used. It would also be good if the description contained the proper definition as multi is insufficient.

Edited: weak-only multi. We were playing ACBL defense 2 (we're not playing against multi often enough to make it worth it to have our own custom defense I'd say).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1- Agree 3, 4 now. This is not an underbid. I overcalled at 3 level red vs white, now i am bidding 4!D a free bid when my pd still has a turn.

 

2-Easy 1, don't know why you asked this. Continuation depends on how it proceeds.

 

3-I would double and correct 3 to 3

 

4-Perfect double and then bid spades if pd responds hearts. This shows a strong hand with spades and alternatives to play such as in diamonds or NT, or I would start 4 or 3. I would not mind 3 but i think it is misguided.

 

5-4 of course. You are playing TM and you have more than minimum excuse to bid game.

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...