IMP, E-W Vul, what do you bid?
#2
Posted 2016-May-14, 11:43
#3
Posted 2016-May-14, 11:58
#5
Posted 2016-May-14, 12:55
If it is 4sf, I would bid 2NT. If it isn't 4sf, then our hand has suddenly grown in strength - but I don't know what continuations I can now bid, that are forcing?
#6
Posted 2016-May-14, 13:35
TylerE, on 2016-May-14, 12:07, said:
Because you weren't strong enough.
London UK
#8
Posted 2016-May-14, 22:01
Trust demands integrity, balance and collaboration.
District 11
Unit 124
Steve Moese
#9
Posted 2016-May-14, 22:27
Wayne_LV, on 2016-May-14, 11:23, said:
- 3♥ = NAT or CUE. Showing ♥ stop and worry about 3N. Partner has already denied 4 ♥s.
- 3N = MAX. With good ♥ stop.
- 2N = NAT. With ♥ stop but partner might pass.
- 3♣ = CUE.
- 5♦ = NAT. With values in partner's suits but your 4333 shape may disappoint partner
- 4♦ = NAT. Blame transfer.
- 3♦ = NAT. Underbid.
- 4♥ = SPL? Misdescriptive.
- 3♠ = NAT. Masochistic.
#13
Posted 2016-May-15, 06:17
As I have 3 honors in the suit I would chance 3NT and hope that the spade bid acts
as a lead deterrent. As there is a known 17 count opposite and I only have 9,
I wouldn't even be thinking of a slam.
- Dr Tarrasch(1862-1934)German Chess Grandmaster
Bridge is a game where you have two opponents...and often three(!)
"Any palooka can take tricks with Aces and Kings; the true expert shows his prowess
by how he handles the two's and three's" - Mollo's Hideous Hog
#14
Posted 2016-May-15, 07:02
Why no votes for a 3♠ "Bluhmer" bid? This can't logically be natural, so can (and should) be used to show the nuts for our previous bidding and zero points in spades. Partner is implying spade shortage - maybe he has:
♠-
♥Axx
♦AQxxxx
♣KQJx
Job done.
#15
Posted 2016-May-15, 07:48
Lou Bluhm championed the bid to show a balanced hand, maximum for his first two (weak) calls, with nothing wasted in spades and all cards working. It is forcing to game in a minor, and leaves it to opener to decide if a minor suit slam is possible.
#16
Posted 2016-May-15, 08:08
notproven, on 2016-May-15, 07:48, said:
#17
Posted 2016-May-15, 08:18
notproven, on 2016-May-15, 07:48, said:
Lou Bluhm championed the bid to show a balanced hand, maximum for his first two (weak) calls, with nothing wasted in spades and all cards working. It is forcing to game in a minor, and leaves it to opener to decide if a minor suit slam is possible.
Of the 994 respondents, only SIX chose 3♠.
I wonder who the other five were
Winner - BBO Challenge bracket #6 - February, 2017.
#18
Posted 2016-May-15, 08:27
PhilKing, on 2016-May-15, 07:02, said:
Why no votes for a 3♠ "Bluhmer" bid? This can't logically be natural, so can (and should) be used to show the nuts for our previous bidding and zero points in spades. Partner is implying spade shortage - maybe he has:
♠-
♥Axx
♦AQxxxx
♣KQJx
Job done.
I was going to mention Bluhmer but forgot to post! Welcome back anyway.
George Carlin
#19
Posted 2016-May-15, 10:21
#20
Posted 2016-May-15, 10:23
PhilKing, on 2016-May-15, 07:02, said:
Why no votes for a 3♠ "Bluhmer" bid? This can't logically be natural, so can (and should) be used to show the nuts for our previous bidding and zero points in spades. Partner is implying spade shortage - maybe he has:
♠-
♥Axx
♦AQxxxx
♣KQJx
Job done.
Well done. This hand was indeed in the Bridge Bulletin and 3♠ was the most popular choice of the expert panel.
The North hand
I realize the hand was contrived to showcase the Bluhmer bid, but as I tried to solve it I could never convince myself from the bidding and the south hand that there was even a sure game, let alone a slam and my choice was 3♥ showing a delayed 3 card raise in hearts and inviting to a heart game. For a slam to be possible I could not conceive of a North hand strong enough to make a slam that would not have opened 2♣
My regular partner and I would have bid the hand as follows per our partnership agreements: