Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Christopher Monsour
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Really? With 4=6 he could have balanced 2 the second time, and with 4=5, except with disparity like on the actual hand, X would have been normal for the first balance. Meanwhile, 3=6=1=3 has no logical path except 1 then X (if you are going to call twice, which is certainly more tempting with a six-card-suit).
April 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
B******t. 3613 is prototypical shape to overall and then double.
April 13
Christopher Monsour edited this comment April 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
By the way, the real fear is not 1NX making. It's not setting it enough when you can bid and make 4.
April 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Some weak NTers partners are unlikely to pass 1N if they are unwilling to pass 1NX….
April 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This hand is a great advert for weak NT. Open 1 and rebid 1N….have your cake and eat it, too.
April 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That has nothing to do with partner and everything to do with (a) robot opponents defending who will never allow for this hand until they see the sixth diamond; (b) knowing that partner is limited to 14, so slam bidding is less of a need.
April 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Let's hope not both…
April 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'd open 1NT at matchpoints, but not at IMPs. The undeserved overtricks that are highly likely after 1N-AP don't matter as much at IMPs. Also, at IMPs you are much more likely to want to play this hand in diamonds. It's tough to get there by opening 1N.
April 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Meanwhile, it is easy to construct hands for partner of 4=1=3=5 and similar shapes, where he needs our help picking the right suit.
April 13
Christopher Monsour edited this comment April 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I still think it's more likely doubler's hand set 1N opposite that than helps it make 2. (Obviously on doubler's actual hand you'll be minus either way, but there seems to be consensus that he has represented a better hand.)
April 13
Christopher Monsour edited this comment April 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Unlikely. This isn't a preempt. It's a constructive bid. Partner should have a very extreme reason to pass it. Extreme enough that it might be right even opposite this.
April 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If I had a forcing bid available to show spades and a minor, I might use it, but no way am I making a non-forcing bid at the two-level. I plan to rebid 3 over partner's 2M.
April 13
ATB
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Well, yes, some male teenagers are of the tortured, hesitating variety. I wouldn't blame testosterone for that, though….
April 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The hand is almost too good for 3NT, but I don't have a cue bid…I hate my first cue bid to be a ruffing value in partners main suit…
April 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Surely 2 is a cue bid. If partner's hand were playable in diamonds it would be even more playable defending 1NX!
April 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I wish I were playing a different system when I pick up this hand.
April 12
ATB
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
100% to North for me, because of the form of scoring. If might be important to compete the partscore (for all South knows both sides have 9-card fits). It is never right to make silly sacrifices at matchpoints. Just take all your tricks on defense.

If this were IMPs, I would say 100% South. At IMPs South doesn't need to obsess about competing the partscore with trashy values, even with a known fit, and North would be taking out reasonable insurance bidding 5, rather than masterminding (especially since South would have a more offensively oriented hand at IMPs than the one he actually held).
April 12
ATB
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No, with testosterone North would bid 4 over 3, instead of this passive-aggressive pass-then-5.
April 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Neither negative free bids nor nearly GF are normal for a 2/1 in competition. 1RF is normal, and this hand (barely) qualifies. Rebid 3.
April 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Duh! Perhaps you should try reading the post!
April 12
.

Bottom Home Top