Help
♠KQ64
♥J102
♦AJ105
♣83
nobody vul, partner deals and opens
2♣-(2♥)-double-(pass)
3♦-(pass)-??
2♣ is precision 10-15. If partner has 4 diamonds he must have 6 clubs at least. No further agreements now, spade bids previous round would be nf 2♠ and game forcing 3♠.
what would be your plan?
Page 1 of 1
double fit in the minors 4-4 vs 6-4
#1
- World International Master without a clue
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 17,404
- Joined: 2003-November-13
- Gender:Male
- Location:madrid
Posted 2012-November-27, 18:22
#2
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 10,092
- Joined: 2008-December-11
- Gender:Male
- Location:North Texas, USA
- Interests:Mountain Biking
Posted 2012-November-27, 19:19
3♦ should show extras like the old 2♣ - 2♦ - 3♦.
I'm too good to pass. 3♥ looks right now.
I'm too good to pass. 3♥ looks right now.
Hi y'all!
Winner - BBO Challenge bracket #6 - February, 2017.
Winner - BBO Challenge bracket #6 - February, 2017.
#3
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 1,316
- Joined: 2011-March-01
- Gender:Male
- Interests:student of the game
Posted 2012-November-28, 09:12
LHO didn't raise hearts. Looks like an unlucky hand for us.
Partner's pattern could be 1=2=4=6
♠ 7
♥ Q5
♦ K972
♣ AKQ652
The limit of this hand could be ten tricks in a minor.
In diamonds we would need to find the queen.
Partner's pattern could be 1=2=4=6
♠ 7
♥ Q5
♦ K972
♣ AKQ652
The limit of this hand could be ten tricks in a minor.
In diamonds we would need to find the queen.
#4
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 10,703
- Joined: 2006-May-18
- Gender:Not Telling
Posted 2012-November-28, 09:17
jogs, on 2012-November-28, 09:12, said:
The limit of this hand could be ten tricks in a minor.
Why try for 10 when you can take 9?
(-: Zel :-)
#5
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 10,092
- Joined: 2008-December-11
- Gender:Male
- Location:North Texas, USA
- Interests:Mountain Biking
Posted 2012-November-28, 10:11
jogs, on 2012-November-28, 09:12, said:
LHO didn't raise hearts. Looks like an unlucky hand for us.
Partner's pattern could be 1=2=4=6
♠ 7
♥ Q5
♦ K972
♣ AKQ652
The limit of this hand could be ten tricks in a minor.
In diamonds we would need to find the queen.
Partner's pattern could be 1=2=4=6
♠ 7
♥ Q5
♦ K972
♣ AKQ652
The limit of this hand could be ten tricks in a minor.
In diamonds we would need to find the queen.
Very true, we can only take 10 in a minor - maybe even only 9 in diamonds.
Hi y'all!
Winner - BBO Challenge bracket #6 - February, 2017.
Winner - BBO Challenge bracket #6 - February, 2017.
#6
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 1,627
- Joined: 2009-November-30
- Location:Oxfordshire, England
Posted 2012-November-28, 11:54
jogs, on 2012-November-28, 09:12, said:
LHO didn't raise hearts. Looks like an unlucky hand for us.
Partner's pattern could be 1=2=4=6
♠ 7
♥ Q5
♦ K972
♣ AKQ652
The limit of this hand could be ten tricks in a minor.
In diamonds we would need to find the queen.
Partner's pattern could be 1=2=4=6
♠ 7
♥ Q5
♦ K972
♣ AKQ652
The limit of this hand could be ten tricks in a minor.
In diamonds we would need to find the queen.
I'm willing to have a go at making 9 tricks in NT opposite that hand, though.
#7
- World International Master without a clue
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 17,404
- Joined: 2003-November-13
- Gender:Male
- Location:madrid
Posted 2012-November-28, 12:27
If you try 3♥ partner bids 4♣
How do you find out?
WellSpyder, on 2012-November-28, 11:54, said:
I'm willing to have a go at making 9 tricks in NT opposite that hand, though.
How do you find out?
#8
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 10,703
- Joined: 2006-May-18
- Gender:Not Telling
Posted 2012-November-29, 02:21
By bidding 3♥. Partner has shown 10 minor suit cards. When we ask for a stopper in that context Qx should probably be acceptable.
(-: Zel :-)
#9
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 6,373
- Joined: 2003-March-15
- Location:Hamburg, Germany
- Interests:games and sports, esp. bridge,chess and (beach-)volleyball
Posted 2012-November-29, 04:51
Qx would not be acceptable for me... Esp. not opposite a partner would just bid X over 2 ♥ from them...
Kind Regards
Roland
Sanity Check: Failure (Fluffy)
More system is not the answer...
Roland
Sanity Check: Failure (Fluffy)
More system is not the answer...
#10
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 10,703
- Joined: 2006-May-18
- Gender:Not Telling
Posted 2012-November-29, 05:57
In that case you are stuck unless you also agree to make a 3♠ call over 3♥ into a form of grope with a half stop. I suppose 3♠ could potentially be 2-way, either a half-stop or 3=0=4=6, with the latter bidding again over 3NT from Responder but that really would be asking for trouble. The only other possibility I can see is for Responder's 3♠ over 3♦ to be either a GF with 5 spades or 4 spades and concentrated values, ie nothing in hearts at all. Then 3♥ would show a half stop. That approach would also not be without issues though.
(-: Zel :-)
#11
- Andy Bowles
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 11,993
- Joined: 2007-May-03
- Gender:Male
- Location:London, UK
Posted 2012-November-29, 05:59
If partner treated x Qx Kxxx AKQxxx as having extras, he must think his ♥Q is worth something. To be consistent, he should probably treat it as a stopper too.
... that would still not be conclusive proof, before someone wants to explain that to me as well as if I was a 5 year-old. - gwnn
#12
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 3,240
- Joined: 2012-June-25
Posted 2012-November-29, 07:34
3♥ f1. Pass 3NT, bid 4♦ NF over 4♣.
Forcing diamond hands raise directly to 4♦. I know everyone plays cue followed by 4♦ as forcing, but that is the wrong way round. You should be able to look for 3NT without having to bid 5m when 3NT is not an option.
Forcing diamond hands raise directly to 4♦. I know everyone plays cue followed by 4♦ as forcing, but that is the wrong way round. You should be able to look for 3NT without having to bid 5m when 3NT is not an option.
#13
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 10,703
- Joined: 2006-May-18
- Gender:Not Telling
Posted 2012-November-29, 07:51
Not everyone Phil, I do it the same way as you - direct raise = unambiguous slam try. I go further and make the direct 4m a range + key card ask too.
(-: Zel :-)
#14
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 1,316
- Joined: 2011-March-01
- Gender:Male
- Interests:student of the game
Posted 2012-November-29, 13:55
Codo, on 2012-November-29, 04:51, said:
Qx would not be acceptable for me... Esp. not opposite a partner would just bid X over 2 ♥ from them...
Qx should be enough. Partner may be trying to right side the NT with Kxx or Ax.
Of course you will probably go down 2 or 3 if he has only xxx.
Page 1 of 1