661_Pete Posted December 1, 2018 Report Share Posted December 1, 2018 Here's a poser for you: BBO hand, I was North:[hv=pc=n&s=skqth6dkq97654ca6&w=saj92haq73da32ct7&n=s63h9854dckqj9843&e=s8754hkjt2djt8c52&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=p1d1nppp]399|300[/hv]Clearly West's 1NT was a bit unsound, but I wasn't to know that! Seeing as I couldn't lead my partner's ♦, my obvious lead was K♣ - although I had little hope of running them - surely my partner would be void or singleton! Partner failed to overtake my K (a slip-up for which she later apologised, to give her credit). Winning the A on round 2, she ventured K♦; declarer ducked the first round, took the marked finesse, and all was over.... Question, would I have given us a better chance by leading the Jack from KQJxxxx? A blatant false-card, yes, but then partner, "knowing" that I can't possibly have the Q, might play me for KJ10xxx and would obviously go up with the A and then return a ♣ through "declarer's Q"... Or alternatively, should I have bid my ♣? At that vulnerability and void in partner's suit, I decided not to. If only.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smerriman Posted December 1, 2018 Report Share Posted December 1, 2018 If you lead the K, you *do* have the Q and either J or T, and overtaking and returning a club is the only option. If partner isn't able to figure that out, I don't think they'll be able to figure out what you *might* have when leading the Jack (especially when it's unlikely you'll hold the King). 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnu Posted December 1, 2018 Report Share Posted December 1, 2018 Maybe you should have led the time tested 4th best club, the ♣9 B-) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyberyeti Posted December 1, 2018 Report Share Posted December 1, 2018 Leading the Q might work, now there's space for you to have ♣QJ109... and an entry so ace and another is obvious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Badger Posted December 1, 2018 Report Share Posted December 1, 2018 I don't think it would matter what honour you led, Pete, with a partner that obviously likes holding onto aces, apology or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Badger Posted December 1, 2018 Report Share Posted December 1, 2018 Leading the Q might work, now there's space for you to have ♣QJ109... and an entry so ace and another is obvious. Obvious for me, obvious for you, Cyberyeti, obvious for Pete, obvious for Pete's partner...mmmm...the jury's out on that one :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nekthen Posted December 1, 2018 Report Share Posted December 1, 2018 No lead the K. Next time partner will get it right. Bidding 2♣ will score if you can stop in 3 as 1N is only -1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyberyeti Posted December 1, 2018 Report Share Posted December 1, 2018 No lead the K. Next time partner will get it right. Bidding 2♣ will score if you can stop in 3 as 1N is only -1. 3♣ doesn't make, lead a trump Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilG007 Posted December 1, 2018 Report Share Posted December 1, 2018 Leading the King is standard and was the correct choice and is the start of the vital exchange of information between the defenders.Although they are known as "Standard" leads.1000s of bridge players get them wrong Result? Their defence starts in confusion. You may be thinking why are these leads so important ? Holding KQJ you would think they are all the same valueAnd they are ...to YOU But you have a partner,you are not trying to defeat declarer single handedly. In defence,your partner is just as importantas you are. And.because neither of you can see the others hand,the only way to concoct a plan is to pass information by means of the cards you playLead the wrong card,as in leading the Jack in this case,and you tell a lie.Unfortunate that your partner failed to unblock but its a lesson for the future! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neilkaz Posted December 1, 2018 Report Share Posted December 1, 2018 Partner was clueless. Overtaking is the only option. She needs to learn to count to 40 HCP. Then it becomes super obvious you can't have anything outside of ♣. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tramticket Posted December 1, 2018 Report Share Posted December 1, 2018 Bidding 2C would not be silly. You will usually double with genuine values, so your holding is within the parameters for the bid. But the best reason not too bid 2C is that you have a good lead (with this club holding, I wouldn't consider a diamond lead, even if I had one). 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephen Tu Posted December 1, 2018 Report Share Posted December 1, 2018 Not only would bidding 2c not be silly, to me not bidding 2c is extremely silly. You have SEVEN clubs and no outside entry. It will be extremely common for partner to hold 0-2 clubs, declarer with Ax/Axx of clubs or something, he ducks once and puts you out of the game at NT defense. You have 6 tricks on offense, maybe only one on defense. So declare. It will be unlucky if partner can't come up with a couple tricks for you to make. And if not then often 1nt was making, no big loss. There's no reason 2c should get you any higher than 2c; 2c is non-forcing with standard agreements. (With good hands that want to force, you double 1nt for penalties first, or cue bid 2nt with extreme shape that wants to force to a suit game). Not to mention making 3c for 110 is lot better than +50 at MP. (trump lead doesn't hold to two, look again Cyberyeti). 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyberyeti Posted December 1, 2018 Report Share Posted December 1, 2018 Not to mention making 3c for 110 is lot better than +50 at MP. (trump lead doesn't hold to two, look again Cyberyeti). Yes you have an entry to dummy at the right time if you win the club in hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msjennifer Posted December 2, 2018 Report Share Posted December 2, 2018 Here's a poser for you: BBO hand, I was North:[hv=pc=n&s=skqth6dkq97654ca6&w=saj92haq73da32ct7&n=s63h9854dckqj9843&e=s8754hkjt2djt8c52&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=p1d1nppp]399|300[/hv]Clearly West's 1NT was a bit unsound, but I wasn't to know that! Seeing as I couldn't lead my partner's ♦, my obvious lead was K♣ - although I had little hope of running them - surely my partner would be void or singleton! Partner failed to overtake my K (a slip-up for which she later apologised, to give her credit). Winning the A on round 2, she ventured K♦; declarer ducked the first round, took the marked finesse, and all was over.... Question, would I have given us a better chance by leading the Jack from KQJxxxx? A blatant false-card, yes, but then partner, "knowing" that I can't possibly have the Q, might play me for KJ10xxx and would obviously go up with the A and then return a ♣ through "declarer's Q"... Or alternatively, should I have bid my ♣? At that vulnerability and void in partner's suit, I decided not to. If only....Sir,the way we play it we will always bid 2C on the given hand.Not only that but ,with our understanding, partner will always compete upto 3C. We will always lead the CK as the suit is a 7 card suit .Partner who is a bookworm shall overtake and return the suit (which anyone will on seeing the xx in dummy) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neilkaz Posted December 2, 2018 Report Share Posted December 2, 2018 Bidding 2C would not be silly. You will usually double with genuine values, so your holding is within the parameters for the bid. But the best reason not too bid 2C is that you have a good lead (with this club holding, I wouldn't consider a diamond lead, even if I had one). I'll bid 2♣ 100% of the time with this hand. If PD doesn't know this is NF and hoping to play, I'll soon be looking for a new one. Good lead or not, much of the time declarer has the ace ♣ and can hold up long enough to shut me out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m1cha Posted December 2, 2018 Report Share Posted December 2, 2018 Just wondering ... [hv=pc=n&s=skqth6dkq97654ca6&w=saj92haq73da32ct7&n=s63h9854dckqj9843&e=s8754hkjt2djt8c52&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=p1d1nppp]399|300[/hv]How crazy is it to rebid 2♦ as South after a pass from North and East? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
haka9 Posted December 2, 2018 Report Share Posted December 2, 2018 Leading against 1 NT was the question. With my regular partner or with a "known" sound partner there is no doubt: ♣ K. With a nondistinguished partner ♣ Q might work. The problem with ♣ Q can be concealing ♣ K. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilG007 Posted December 2, 2018 Report Share Posted December 2, 2018 Here's a poser for you: BBO hand, I was North:[hv=pc=n&s=skqth6dkq97654ca6&w=saj92haq73da32ct7&n=s63h9854dckqj9843&e=s8754hkjt2djt8c52&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=p1d1nppp]399|300[/hv]Clearly West's 1NT was a bit unsound, but I wasn't to know that! Seeing as I couldn't lead my partner's ♦, my obvious lead was K♣ - although I had little hope of running them - surely my partner would be void or singleton! Partner failed to overtake my K (a slip-up for which she later apologised, to give her credit). Winning the A on round 2, she ventured K♦; declarer ducked the first round, took the marked finesse, and all was over.... Question, would I have given us a better chance by leading the Jack from KQJxxxx? A blatant false-card, yes, but then partner, "knowing" that I can't possibly have the Q, might play me for KJ10xxx and would obviously go up with the A and then return a ♣ through "declarer's Q"... Or alternatively, should I have bid my ♣? At that vulnerability and void in partner's suit, I decided not to. If only.... I would certainly bid 2♣ on the North hand Why not? Its a strong 7 suit headed by sequential honours. The question is,having bid the suitwould your partner be alive of the potential misfit and the subsequent dangers of that situation? I would advise the pair of you to have a discussion about misfits and how to deal with them when they arise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tramticket Posted December 2, 2018 Report Share Posted December 2, 2018 How crazy is it to rebid 2♦ as South after a pass from North and East? You know that West has diamonds. West's diamonds might be AJTXX. 2D doubled could be very expensive if IMPs - do you really want to compete for a risky part-score? But strengthen the suit quality (give yourself the J as well) and it becomes more reasonable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmnka447 Posted December 2, 2018 Report Share Posted December 2, 2018 I'm bidding 2 ♣ on the North hand. If you have 8+ points as North, you'd consider doubling 1 NT for penalties. So any bid you make directly after the 1 NT call is to play and not forward going. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdano Posted December 2, 2018 Report Share Posted December 2, 2018 You know that West has diamonds. West's diamonds might be AJTXX. 2D doubled could be very expensive if IMPs - do you really want to compete for a risky part-score? But strengthen the suit quality (give yourself the J as well) and it becomes more reasonable.Come on. For one thing, West might pass with AJTxx. For another, on a more typical layout, West has AJx, and you contribute 2-3 tricks on defense versus 1NT, versus 7-8 tricks when declaring 2♦. Bidding 2♦ seems obvious to me. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tramticket Posted December 3, 2018 Report Share Posted December 3, 2018 Come on. For one thing, West might pass with AJTxx. For another, on a more typical layout, West has AJx, and you contribute 2-3 tricks on defense versus 1NT, versus 7-8 tricks when declaring 2♦. Bidding 2♦ seems obvious to me. Maybe I am being too pessimistic, but whilst the chances of going two-off doubled are low, they are not insignificant and opps are well places to double if this is right. Meanwhile, to get any upside at this vulnerability you need to make 2♦ with 1NT also making. But much of the time when partner has a little something to help you make two diamonds (♦JX in diamonds maybe?) a diamond lead will be beating 1NT - often by several tricks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
661_Pete Posted December 3, 2018 Author Report Share Posted December 3, 2018 I accept that 2♣ bid was probably way2go. :unsure: I get it wrong often enough! I should point out that this was on BBO, in the casual play rooms, where you often don't know anything about your pick-up partner. I was thinking, with hindsight, of how to optimise one's chances regardless of partner's ability. In live bridge at my local club (where - if I may be so bold - the standard is perhaps a wee bit higher than BBO), I know most of my partners and would trust them better! Does this sound pompous? If so, sorry. Another BBO moment. Partner (a different one) saw fit to 'rescue' my 2♥ opening (weak 2) into 2♠ - despite holding three hearts in their hand. I 'trusted' partner and left it in 2♠. Defence hadn't intervened. Needless to say, holding nine hearts, hearts not being trumps, we were seriously exposed to a ruff by defence - and that's exactly what happened! I had a few 'words' with partner over that - I tried to be as gentle as I could. Probably best not to make a habit of it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tramticket Posted December 3, 2018 Report Share Posted December 3, 2018 Another BBO moment. Partner (a different one) saw fit to 'rescue' my 2♥ opening (weak 2) into 2♠ - despite holding three hearts in their hand. I 'trusted' partner and left it in 2♠. You don't give the hands, but are you sure that the 2♠ bid was a rescue? In my experience, there are at least three ways to play the bid:1. A rescue (partnerships who open weak 2s on revolting 5-card suits headed by the 9 tend to favour this method).2. Constructive, but non-forcing.3. Forcing (the method that I favour). Playing with me, you would not be showing "trust" by passing 2♠. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmnka447 Posted December 3, 2018 Report Share Posted December 3, 2018 Another BBO moment. Partner (a different one) saw fit to 'rescue' my 2♥ opening (weak 2) into 2♠ - despite holding three hearts in their hand. I 'trusted' partner and left it in 2♠. Defence hadn't intervened. Needless to say, holding nine hearts, hearts not being trumps, we were seriously exposed to a ruff by defence - and that's exactly what happened! I had a few 'words' with partner over that - I tried to be as gentle as I could. This auction is one of those that is difficult with a pickup partner as you've never discussed it. It's also one that will be in the discussion of any pair that has time to discuss what they are playing, such as a pickup partnership at a club game where you go over the convention card. My sense is that more people play new suits over weak 2s by an unpassed hand as forcing than don't. If your partner was a passed hand, then you were correct and partner should have raised or passed. If partner was unpassed, it's possible that partner was showing ♠ and looking for a feature in your hand in order to bid game. With something like ♠ AKQxx ♥ xxx ♦ x ♣ Kxx, game is a good bet if you can show a feature in a minor or show solid ♥. 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.