[Cyberyeti]

Quote

I bid 1N transfer to clubs - not playing that ? you need a way of bidding clubs naturally.

mfa1010, on 2013-January-15, 10:57, said:

I feel that giving up on a having natural 1NT is a much too big a price to pay for being able to show the opponent's opening suit naturally, even if 1♣ could be short.
So I'm not hooked on making that change. 1NT comes up a lot.

I was being facetious but the point remains, on this hand you lose little by forcing to game, but imagine the same hand minus a queen. That's completely unbiddable.

I probably have to bid 3N but don't like it (or is that another raise ?)

[akhare]

We play transfer advances and the (1♣) - 1♠ - 2♥ - 3N sequence should probably show a hand with 2 card support and offer a COG.

However, in the absence of an explicit agreement, 3N seems like the most practical bid.

[JLOGIC]

+1, I am on board the 2N as a raise train, but I don't play it when RHO passes, I think a natural 2N is too valuable there.

I think I am endplayed into 3N here but that could work out horribly with AQ AQ98 in the majors obviously.

[mfa1010]

Thanks for comments (more comments are welcome ).

I chose 3N but felt lousy about it. Jumping all the way from 1♠ to 3N when it so easily could be wrong felt like a beginner's bid.

---

The contract was reasonable, though. The declaring had a fun theme as it went:

Lead ♦3 third/fifth, to ♦8, ♦K, ♦6.
East shifts to ♥J (denying the T according to their agreements).

[Trinidad]

Why not 2♥ (♠ raise), followed by 3♥ (natural game try, forcing to 3♠)? That way you will be able to put spades and hearts in the picture and you may be able to bid 3NT should partner bid 3♠.

Seems to me that this way you can have your cake, eat it too and put some in the freezer.

Rik

[gnasher]

mfa1010, on 2013-January-15, 15:19, said:

Lead ♦3 third/fifth, to ♦8, ♦K, ♦6.
East shifts to ♥J (denying the T according to their agreements).

Win the ace and lead ♠Q. I thought this only appeared in books.

[JLOGIC]

Win the ace, play the SQ.

edit: lol slow pony, shoulda refreshed

[JLOGIC]

Trinidad, on 2013-January-15, 15:31, said:

Why not 2♥ (♠ raise), followed by 3♥ (natural game try, forcing to 3♠)? That way you will be able to put spades and hearts in the picture and you may be able to bid 3NT should partner bid 3♠.

Seems to me that this way you can have your cake, eat it too and put some in the freezer.

Rik

Because you only have 2 spades and partner will think you have 3 per your agreements? I think the agreements are just flawed.

[mfa1010]

Trinidad, on 2013-January-15, 15:31, said:

Why not 2♥ (♠ raise), followed by 3♥ (natural game try, forcing to 3♠)? That way you will be able to put spades and hearts in the picture and you may be able to bid 3NT should partner bid 3♠.

Seems to me that this way you can have your cake, eat it too and put some in the freezer.

Rik

Sounds cool
Maybe your suggestion is the best. But we will get out of 3N a lot, since partner will not play us for such massive clubs and only 2 spades.

gnasher, on 2013-January-15, 15:40, said:

Win the ace and lead ♠Q. I thought this only appeared in books.

No surprise that the forum spotted this line in seconds

JLOGIC, on 2013-January-15, 15:57, said:

Because you only have 2 spades and partner will think you have 3 per your agreements? I think the agreements are just flawed.

Any suggestions for improvement are most welcome. I will proceed with the thing about 2N being natural, especially when RHO passes.

[lowerline]

mfa1010, on 2013-January-15, 08:58, said:

♠AQ
♥AQ98
♦J6
♣QJT72

(1♣) - 1♠ - (pass) - ?

None vul.

You have agreed to play transfer responses:
2♦ would show a heart suit, at least 5 cards.
2♥ would show 10+ with a 3-card fit.
2NT would show a 4-card fit.

What would you do?

3nt. Take away one of those queens and I would bid 2♥. Don't forget that 2♥ can also be bid with a strong hand without support (especially because a natural 2nt advance is not available).

Steven

[rhm]

mfa1010, on 2013-January-15, 09:31, said:

3♣, 3♦, 3♥ and 4♦ would also be raises in our system.

If you have any good suggestions about system I would love to hear them.

If you only have a hammer everything looks like a nail.
If everything is a raise, it gets hard to show good hands, which cannot raise.
Seems to me like an overkill.
After a wide ranging overcall I would want a cuebid, which does not necessarily imply a fit.
Differentiating between 3 card and 4 card support is not as crucial as people believe as long as it is understood that 3 card support must have compensating values to belong in the same strength category.
3NT is an obvious bid in your system

Rainer Herrmann

[gnasher]

I don't think you should change your methods because of one deal, especially as you had two half-reasonable options and you got to a sensible contract anyway.

Quote

Differentiating between 3 card and 4 card support is not as crucial as people believe as long as it is understood that 3 card support must have compensating values to belong in the same strength category.

The distinction between 3- and 4-card support is important if there is further competition. If we compare a 3-card raise and a 4-card raise of equivalent offensive strength, the 3-card raise will usually have better defence.

[Fluffy]

4♠ looks like a better contract, I read an article where someone advocated always pulling to 4M when having AK stiff as support opposite a 5 card weak hand, I don't think AQ is that different. Not that I will force it, (specially having 5 good clubs) but giving partner the option to pick it sounds reasonable.

[mfa1010]

rhm, on 2013-January-16, 05:17, said:

If you only have a hammer everything looks like a nail.
If everything is a raise, it gets hard to show good hands, which cannot raise.
Seems to me like an overkill.
After a wide ranging overcall I would want a cuebid, which does not necessarily imply a fit.
Differentiating between 3 card and 4 card support is not as crucial as people believe as long as it is understood that 3 card support must have compensating values to belong in the same strength category.
3NT is an obvious bid in your system

Rainer Herrmann

Thanks for your thoughts.

It is not entirely clear to me what your suggested solution is.
If 2♣ could be a good 3-card raise or a good 4-card raise, but also a good hand with no fit, then it seems to me that it will be hard for overcaller to proceed or judge a competitive auction.

[jogs]

mfa1010, on 2013-January-15, 15:19, said:

Thanks for comments (more comments are welcome ).

I chose 3N but felt lousy about it. Jumping all the way from 1♠ to 3N when it so easily could be wrong felt like a beginner's bid.

---

The contract was reasonable, though. The declaring had a fun theme as it went:

Lead ♦3 third/fifth, to ♦8, ♦K, ♦6.
East shifts to ♥J (denying the T according to their agreements).

Friendly defense by East. Doesn't diamond back at
trick 2 give you no play? Please post the entire
hand. Thank you.

[mfa1010]

West had Kxxx, Kxx, Qxx, Kxx so if they persist in diamonds, we duck once more and make it easily with clubs coming in for 5 tricks.

[gnasher]

We'd be OK if he was 3334 too. Win the third diamond and play a spade to the queen.

If he takes the first spade and plays ♣K, we play low.

If he ducks ♠K, we play ♣Q, ♣J, club to the ace, spade to the ace, club to endplay him.

[jogs]

mfa1010, on 2013-January-16, 09:49, said:

West had Kxxx, Kxx, Qxx, Kxx so if they persist in diamonds, we duck once more and make it easily with clubs coming in for 5 tricks.

They should persist in diamonds. If you play carelessly you could go down.
Do you pitch a heart on the third diamond? Then what on trick 4?
Spade to queen. West wins king and play the club king to the next
trick. You must remember to duck. If you win this trick, you may
limit yourself to 5 clubs and 3 aces in the other suits.

[mgoetze]

jogs, on 2013-January-16, 09:25, said:

Please post the entire hand. Thank you.

This is the Expert-Class Bridge forum. If you want problems to be simplified for you, you should hang out in the I/A forum instead.

[dake50]

What bid asks "tell me more?" Esp. min/max, 2nd suit, extra length, good controls.
Use that advancer-taking-charge bid. You designed that into your scheme, surely.