My link
Matchpoints, ACBL robot individual
I find several aspects of this auction puzzling, namely:
1. Why doesn't North raise 2NT directly to 3NT? We're forced to that level, North has a weak hand with a lousy ♠ suit and stoppers in the unbids. Where is it trying to go with its 3♦ bid? A precisely bid 4♦ contract that will get us a 0?
2. Why does my 3♠ bid show 3-card support at this point in the auction? Shouldn't there be a mechanism for showing strong doubleton support at this point? I could have showed 3 card support in a number of ways over North's 2♠ rebid (e.g., raising to 3 or 4 or splintering).
3. Why does North cue bid with its terrible, terrible hand? Surely this is the point where North must bid 3NT. With all this bidding, shouldn't South now expect North to have a very good hand?
4. Why does North "correct" to 6♠? North knows that I have only 3♠s, but it also knows that I have 4♦, and on this auction it should sound to North like it will be necessary to rough at least 1 ♣ in South. Holding ♠9xxxx North has to know that even if I have ♠AKQ this will promote a trump trick for East-West. It should also know that a 4-4 fit almost always plays a trick better than a 5-3 fit, particularly when the contract is a close one. Isn't simming supposed to figure these things out?
Page 1 of 1
Bewitched, Bothered and Bewildered
#2
Posted 2015-April-25, 14:08
Nitpicky, but...
2♥ description includes "12+ HCP". 2N description includes "13-18 HCP". So, would 3N instead of 2N have shown exactly 12 HPC, and balanced 19+ HCP hands would have done something different?
2♥ description includes "12+ HCP". 2N description includes "13-18 HCP". So, would 3N instead of 2N have shown exactly 12 HPC, and balanced 19+ HCP hands would have done something different?
#3
Posted 2015-April-25, 14:28
uva72uva72, on 2015-April-25, 14:02, said:
1. Why doesn't North raise 2NT directly to 3NT? We're forced to that level, North has a weak hand with a lousy ♠ suit and stoppers in the unbids. Where is it trying to go with its 3♦ bid? A precisely bid 4♦ contract that will get us a 0?
uva72uva72, on 2015-April-25, 14:02, said:
2. Why does my 3♠ bid show 3-card support at this point in the auction? Shouldn't there be a mechanism for showing strong doubleton support at this point? I could have showed 3 card support in a number of ways over North's 2♠ rebid (e.g., raising to 3 or 4 or splintering).
uva72uva72, on 2015-April-25, 14:02, said:
3. Why does North cue bid with its terrible, terrible hand? Surely this is the point where North must bid 3NT. With all this bidding, shouldn't South now expect North to have a very good hand?
uva72uva72, on 2015-April-25, 14:02, said:
4. Why does North "correct" to 6♠? North knows that I have only 3♠s, but it also knows that I have 4♦, and on this auction it should sound to North like it will be necessary to rough at least 1 ♣ in South. Holding ♠9xxxx North has to know that even if I have ♠AKQ this will promote a trump trick for East-West. It should also know that a 4-4 fit almost always plays a trick better than a 5-3 fit, particularly when the contract is a close one. Isn't simming supposed to figure these things out?
#4
Posted 2015-April-25, 16:24
3♠ by responder is like 99.9% 2♠ in my opinion otherwise using 2♠ as potentially 5-card minimum is unplayable. (responder with 3♠ has to raise rd 2.)
My pet peave Gib is using pts for it's ♥ singleton in your suit (not that useful) to scounge up enough to make 14+ pts and a 4♦ cuebid. The Walrus would be proud.
My pet peave Gib is using pts for it's ♥ singleton in your suit (not that useful) to scounge up enough to make 14+ pts and a 4♦ cuebid. The Walrus would be proud.
Sarcasm is a state of mind
#5
Posted 2015-April-25, 22:19
Generally speaking,3♠ by responder usually shows doubleton support with one top card in it.
I think here its explanation is wrong.
I think here its explanation is wrong.
Page 1 of 1