lamford Posted April 8, 2017 Report Share Posted April 8, 2017 [hv=pc=n&s=shakdkj986432c987&d=n&v=b&b=13&a=1sp]133|200[/hv] Your go. Camrose (a strong international event). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nige1 Posted April 8, 2017 Report Share Posted April 8, 2017 [hv=pc=n&s=shakdkj986432c987&d=n&v=b&b=13&a=1sp]133|200|Your go. Camrose (a strong international event).[/hv]Assuming no special agreements, I rank2♦ = NAT. Constructive.3♦ = NAT. PRE. Timid but allowing room for partner to bid 3N.5♦ = NAT. PRE. Prefer this to 4♦.4♦ = NAT. PRE. 4 and 5 level pre-empts remove 3N as a possibility.Double = T/O. A distortion.3♠ = ART. Asking for a ♠ stop. A bid weird because it usually implies a good hand with a solid suit.PSYCHs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhm Posted April 8, 2017 Report Share Posted April 8, 2017 I am a strong believer that you should resolve such close distributional decisions in favor of overbidding.There is much more to loose by going low than high. Going high allows for better information exchange regarding strain and level.Partner could have a minimum hand with diamond support and a void in cubs, say ♠QJxxxx ♥QJxx ♦Axx ♣- Bid 2♦ and if that is forcing to game so be it. This one is not even close Believe me, even if game has no chance, you will rarely get doubled when your bidding is unlimited. Rainer Herrmann Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfi Posted April 8, 2017 Report Share Posted April 8, 2017 Assuming no special agreements... One special agreement is that you don't get to double partner's opening. That might change your choices. Anything but 2D just seems odd. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveMoe Posted April 8, 2017 Report Share Posted April 8, 2017 A good argument for 1M - 3m to be invitational (and non-fitting). Think 10 to 12 minus and 0-2 M cards. Better use than preempt (wrong sides hands). Unencumbers forcing NT. Absent that tool, 2♦ looks better than 1N for reasons stated upthread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted April 8, 2017 Report Share Posted April 8, 2017 Even if I played 1M 3x as invitational this hand is simply too good. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neilkaz Posted April 8, 2017 Report Share Posted April 8, 2017 Why wouldn't one bid 2♦? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nige1 Posted April 8, 2017 Report Share Posted April 8, 2017 One special agreement is that you don't get to double partner's opening. That might change your choices. Anything but 2D just seems odd.I misread the problem :(I agree with sfi's 2♦ :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lamford Posted April 8, 2017 Author Report Share Posted April 8, 2017 One special agreement is that you don't get to double partner's opening. That might change your choices.Is that what the Laws refer to as a "special partnership understanding"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfi Posted April 8, 2017 Report Share Posted April 8, 2017 Is that what the Laws refer to as a "special partnership understanding"? Maybe the latest version of the laws is changing the game more than I thought ... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lamford Posted April 9, 2017 Author Report Share Posted April 9, 2017 At the table in this major international event, South bid 5D and North, with AJxxxx x Qx AKQx raised to the cold slam ... easy game bridge Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyberyeti Posted April 9, 2017 Report Share Posted April 9, 2017 At the table in this major international event, South bid 5D and North, with AJxxx x Qx AKQx raised to the cold slam ... easy game bridge Did he fail to notice he only had 12 cards ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhm Posted April 9, 2017 Report Share Posted April 9, 2017 At the table in this major international event, South bid 5D and North, with AJxxx x Qx AKQx raised to the cold slam ... easy game bridgeYes, when you guess right it's an easy game. Rainer Herrmann Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lamford Posted April 9, 2017 Author Report Share Posted April 9, 2017 Did he fail to notice he only had 12 cards ?Sorry, I find that he had AJxxxx spades Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmnka447 Posted April 9, 2017 Report Share Posted April 9, 2017 I'll start with 2 ♦ and keep rebidding ♦. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WellSpyder Posted April 10, 2017 Report Share Posted April 10, 2017 At the table in this major international event, South bid 5D and North, with AJxxxx x Qx AKQx raised to the cold slam ... easy game bridgeI'm guessing this pair don't play exclusion key-card, then? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr1303 Posted April 11, 2017 Report Share Posted April 11, 2017 I bid 2D. I expect my next bid is 3D. My bid after that will probably be 4D. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dinarius Posted April 18, 2017 Report Share Posted April 18, 2017 Agree with almost all of what has been said. To me there isn't even a question. I bid 2♦. Constructive and forcing. D. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted April 19, 2017 Report Share Posted April 19, 2017 I misread the problem :(I agree with sfi's 2♦ :)O.K., then I will agree with RHM's 2♦, since he said it first. 1 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.