BBO Discussion Forums: Riverside Swiss #2 - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Riverside Swiss #2 a lucky break (or two)

#1 User is offline   bhall 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 216
  • Joined: 2007-April-29

Posted 2008-February-03, 22:02

Scoring: IMP

Third round action


In third chair after two passes, you (South) open 1♦, doubled on your left, and partner responds 1♠. You raise to 2♠ over the intervening pass. Or would you take some more creative action? The auction continues, in tempo, 3♥-P-4♥. Are you content?

I wasn't. I suspected a massive ♥ fit and a stiff ♠, and so tried 4♠. This was duly doubled in passout seat (by East)...and made! A heart lead was ruffed, a club was lost, but the ♦ Q and J were split, so nobody wanted to break that suit, and a second heart was led. ♣s were 3-3, spades 3-1, and the contract came home.

Had ♣ been 4-2, or the ♣J behind me (with the K or A), 4♥ would make. A success indeed. But was it wise?
just plain Bill
0

#2 Guest_Jlall_*

  • Group: Guests

Posted 2008-February-04, 06:12

The problem with this hand was the 2S bid. You realized later that your hand was worth more than 2S, that is why you bid again and had a seemingly inconsistent auction. IMO, especially after partner has bid 1S over a X (a stronger action than 1S over a pass in terms of spade quality and overall hand strength), you are clearly worth a 3H bid if that is a non GF splinter in your system, or 3S otherwise. Then you can leave it up to partner what to do if they bid 4H, and he has an easy choice to bid. The way you bid it did not involve partner and risked taking a phantom save as well as getting passed out in 2S cold for a game imo.
0

#3 User is offline   bhall 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 216
  • Joined: 2007-April-29

Posted 2008-February-04, 10:26

I agree, my action was much too unilateral. Holding two relatively certain defensive tricks, and knowing that hearts are breaking poorly behind declarer, I should probably have passed.

I wish we had been playing mini-splinters, so that I could put partner in the picture. Failing that, I think 3♠ would have been my best choice. However, partner's 1♠ response over the double did not show a fifth ♠ or more-than-minimum values.
just plain Bill
0

#4 Guest_Jlall_*

  • Group: Guests

Posted 2008-February-04, 10:37

bhall, on Feb 4 2008, 11:26 AM, said:

However, partner's 1♠ response over the double did not show a fifth ♠ or more-than-minimum values.

What I meant was more like this:

With Jxxx AJx Kxx xxx I think after the double most people would bid 1NT. I think that without a double most people would bid 1S. Maybe you don't agree with this, or maybe my perception of what most good players do is wrong.

Also, with Axxx Jx xxxx xxx I think after the double most people would pass, and without the double most people would bid. Again, maybe my perception is wrong.

The double eliminates the need to bid with marginal hands in order to avoid missing game and degrades the preemptive/steal from them value of bidding with marginal hands. The double also increases the chance of a bad split and makes it kind of sucky to introduce bad 4 card major suits with flattish hands and decreases the likelihood that a 4-4 fit will be best. Maybe I'm off here, or this is a regional thing.

I realize I did not word this very well in my first post.
0

#5 User is offline   bhall 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 216
  • Joined: 2007-April-29

Posted 2008-February-04, 10:54

I think that your observations are pretty accurate, regarding the hands that you cite. However, most would upgrade high cards behind the doubler, and most would want a ♠ lead holding AJxx and a random Q.

Initially, I was tempted to underbid because of the strong possibility that partner held a wasted ♥ card. So when that became unlikely on the auction, I was tempted again, this time to overbid as a two-way shot, that they would either take the push, or that 4♠ would be a cheap sacrifice. I really had no expectation that we might make.

I put this in my list of "bad bids, rewarded."
just plain Bill
0

#6 Guest_Jlall_*

  • Group: Guests

Posted 2008-February-04, 10:59

bhall, on Feb 4 2008, 11:54 AM, said:

I think that your observations are pretty accurate, regarding the hands that you cite. However, most would upgrade high cards behind the doubler, and most would want a ♠ lead holding AJxx and a random Q.

Ya what I really meant was that partner won't have a crappy suit and a marginal hand because he would just pass, and that increases the chance that bidding 3S is right. It was really a small point that I overstated... if there had been no X I would still bid 3S.

BTW if this is the worst sequence you ever perpetrate you can win a bermuda bowl B)
0
Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users