Help
Scoring: IMP
Auction:
1♦ P 1♠ P
3♠ P ?
What is your call?
Page 1 of 1
Worth a slam try?
#1
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 595
- Joined: 2008-April-30
- Location:Pleasanton, CA, US
Posted 2008-May-17, 12:12
Auction:
1♦ P 1♠ P
3♠ P ?
What is your call?
#2
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 9,151
- Joined: 2003-June-11
- Location:Southern California
Posted 2008-May-17, 12:17
This is the perfect hand for a non-serious 3N. If he likes his hand, I feel comfortable with 4♦. There's a lot to like about this hand.
Not playing this, 4♦ is OK, but pard could go overboard.
Not playing this, 4♦ is OK, but pard could go overboard.
"Phil" on BBO
#3 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2008-May-17, 13:23
Yes this is easily worth a slam try. In fact if I had to decide the contract right now I would bid 6S.
#4
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 14,900
- Joined: 2004-May-11
- Gender:Male
- Location:Portugal
- Interests:Everything!
Posted 2008-May-17, 13:42
agree with all the above
note opener is likely to have 5 diams
note opener is likely to have 5 diams
#5
- The Abbess
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 17,199
- Joined: 2004-April-22
- Gender:Female
- Location:Copenhagen, Denmark
- Interests:History, languages
Posted 2008-May-17, 14:34
I don't think frivolous 3NT should apply here. Opener is limited.
3NT could be choice of game but since opener must be unbalanced, it is probably more useful to play it as a slam invite without shortness. Then 4♣ shows shortness.
I would just bid 4♠ though but who am I to argue with Phil and Justin.
3NT could be choice of game but since opener must be unbalanced, it is probably more useful to play it as a slam invite without shortness. Then 4♣ shows shortness.
I would just bid 4♠ though but who am I to argue with Phil and Justin.
The world would be such a happy place, if only everyone played Acol :) --- TramTicket
#6
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 9,151
- Joined: 2003-June-11
- Location:Southern California
Posted 2008-May-17, 14:52
helene_t, on May 17 2008, 12:34 PM, said:
I don't think frivolous 3NT should apply here. Opener is limited.
3NT could be choice of game but since opener must be unbalanced, it is probably more useful to play it as a slam invite without shortness. Then 4♣ shows shortness.
I would just bid 4♠ though but who am I to argue with Phil and Justin.
3NT could be choice of game but since opener must be unbalanced, it is probably more useful to play it as a slam invite without shortness. Then 4♣ shows shortness.
I would just bid 4♠ though but who am I to argue with Phil and Justin.
Well, its a matter of agreement, but I disagree that it should not. We have an eight card fit and there's little use in playing 3N as natural.
I can buy 3N as either shortness denying or even a shortness ask. Sort of like the old mathe asking bid.
"Phil" on BBO
#7
- Brain Farts and Actual Farts Increasing with Age
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 9,586
- Joined: 2005-September-21
- Gender:Male
- Location:Lima, Allen County, North-West-Central Ohio, USA
- Interests:www.limadbc.blogspot.com editor/contributor
Posted 2008-May-17, 16:19
I think I'd bid 3NT also, but as serious. The reason is that I want to get under a 4♣ cue in case partner cannot cue clubs. If partner, for example, cues 4♦ next, I'm taking over.
If partner does cue 4♣, I can cue 4♦ and the reject a 4♥ cue. Because I bid 3NT, "rejecting" a 4♥ cue is "last train" for me. Had that been enough, I'd ask. I cannot have no interest after the only available cue, so the "rejection" suggests bidding on if Opener has a reason.
If partner does cue 4♣, I can cue 4♦ and the reject a 4♥ cue. Because I bid 3NT, "rejecting" a 4♥ cue is "last train" for me. Had that been enough, I'd ask. I cannot have no interest after the only available cue, so the "rejection" suggests bidding on if Opener has a reason.
"Gibberish in, gibberish out. A trial judge, three sets of lawyers, and now three appellate judges cannot agree on what this law means. And we ask police officers, prosecutors, defense lawyers, and citizens to enforce or abide by it? The legislature continues to write unreadable statutes. Gibberish should not be enforced as law."
-P.J. Painter.
-P.J. Painter.
#8
- Limit bidder
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 8,482
- Joined: 2004-November-02
- Gender:Female
- Location:England
- Interests:Bridge, classical music, skiing... but I spend more time earning a living than doing any of those
Posted 2008-May-17, 16:43
to answer the original question: yes, it's worth a slam try but not a slam force
KQxx
Kx
KQxxx
Ax
is a not very exciting hand opposite and 6S is huge
KQxx
Kx
KQxxx
Ax
is a not very exciting hand opposite and 6S is huge
#9
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 16,838
- Joined: 2003-October-07
- Gender:Male
Posted 2008-May-17, 17:47
MarkDean, on May 17 2008, 01:12 PM, said:
|
|
Auction:
1♦ P 1♠ P
3♠ P ?
What is your call?
4d
KISS
Option two=6s
#10
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 3,726
- Joined: 2006-June-05
- Location:Oslo, Norway
- Interests:Bridge, sports, Sci-fi, fantasy
Posted 2008-May-18, 02:20
kenrexford, on May 18 2008, 12:19 AM, said:
I think I'd bid 3NT also, but as serious. The reason is that I want to get under a 4♣ cue in case partner cannot cue clubs. If partner, for example, cues 4♦ next, I'm taking over.
If partner does cue 4♣, I can cue 4♦ and the reject a 4♥ cue. Because I bid 3NT, "rejecting" a 4♥ cue is "last train" for me. Had that been enough, I'd ask. I cannot have no interest after the only available cue, so the "rejection" suggests bidding on if Opener has a reason.
If partner does cue 4♣, I can cue 4♦ and the reject a 4♥ cue. Because I bid 3NT, "rejecting" a 4♥ cue is "last train" for me. Had that been enough, I'd ask. I cannot have no interest after the only available cue, so the "rejection" suggests bidding on if Opener has a reason.
Agree with this.
And if I can't bid 3NT for some reason, a 4♣ cue is soooooo obvious.
Kind regards,
Harald
Harald
#11
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 2,303
- Joined: 2003-February-14
- Location:England
Posted 2008-May-18, 03:53
FrancesHinden, on May 17 2008, 10:43 PM, said:
to answer the original question: yes, it's worth a slam try but not a slam force
KQxx
Kx
KQxxx
Ax
is a not very exciting hand opposite and 6S is huge
KQxx
Kx
KQxxx
Ax
is a not very exciting hand opposite and 6S is huge
I think a 4 loser hand is very exciting for a 3 level raise.
But I agree we are worth a slam try.
#12 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2008-May-18, 08:34
pclayton, on May 17 2008, 03:52 PM, said:
helene_t, on May 17 2008, 12:34 PM, said:
I don't think frivolous 3NT should apply here. Opener is limited.
3NT could be choice of game but since opener must be unbalanced, it is probably more useful to play it as a slam invite without shortness. Then 4♣ shows shortness.
I would just bid 4♠ though but who am I to argue with Phil and Justin.
3NT could be choice of game but since opener must be unbalanced, it is probably more useful to play it as a slam invite without shortness. Then 4♣ shows shortness.
I would just bid 4♠ though but who am I to argue with Phil and Justin.
Well, its a matter of agreement, but I disagree that it should not. We have an eight card fit and there's little use in playing 3N as natural.
I can buy 3N as either shortness denying or even a shortness ask. Sort of like the old mathe asking bid.
I used to play 3N as shortness ask on this auction and 1S p 3S(limit) before i played NS 3N. Not sure which I like more.
#13
- - - T98765432 AQT8
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 15,085
- Joined: 2005-June-23
- Gender:Male
- Location:Las Vegas, NV
Posted 2008-May-18, 10:40
I would play 3NT natural on this auction, maybe I'm boring. My non-serious slam try is cuebid once then bid 4♠! I must be crazy. Anyway easy slam try on this hand.
Between Jlall's suggestions I think shortness ask is probably good. What is the point in so many levels of slam tries when partner is on a very specific range?
Between Jlall's suggestions I think shortness ask is probably good. What is the point in so many levels of slam tries when partner is on a very specific range?
Please let me know about any questions or interest or bug reports about GIB.
#14 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2008-May-18, 10:52
It's not clear partner's range is so specific. Certainly in terms of HCP and slam suitability his hand can have a wide range. In theory I suppose his playing strength range is pretty narrow but that is kind of like weak NTers saying the auction 1C p 1S p 2S is ok since balanced 16 counts and 11 counts with a stiff are roughly the same, I don't really buy that.
#15
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 3,465
- Joined: 2006-January-07
- Location:Montreal Canada
- Interests:All games. i really mean all of them.
Posted 2008-May-19, 00:08
Partner most likely hand is probably a 4153 wich is great shape for us (depending what would he open with 4144). Not making a slam try is a clear mistake.
From Psych "I mean, Gus and I never see eye-to-eye on work stuff.
For instance, he doesn't like being used as a human shield when we're being shot at.
I happen to think it's a very noble way to meet one's maker, especially for a guy like him.
Bottom line is we never let that difference of opinion interfere with anything."
For instance, he doesn't like being used as a human shield when we're being shot at.
I happen to think it's a very noble way to meet one's maker, especially for a guy like him.
Bottom line is we never let that difference of opinion interfere with anything."
#16
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 595
- Joined: 2008-April-30
- Location:Pleasanton, CA, US
Posted 2008-May-19, 00:22
benlessard, on May 19 2008, 01:08 AM, said:
Partner most likely hand is probably a 4153 wich is great shape for us (depending what would he open with 4144). Not making a slam try is a clear mistake.
I bid 4D with the hand, thinking along the same lines as you, but then I realized that with that hand type, partner would bid 3H - invite with heart shortness. That made me think perhaps I had overbid. Turns out not to matter as we are off two key cards, but have everything else in the deck, so all roads lead to 650.
Parnter's hand:
♠KQxx
♥KJ
♦KQxxxx
♣Q
#17
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 3,465
- Joined: 2006-January-07
- Location:Montreal Canada
- Interests:All games. i really mean all of them.
Posted 2008-May-19, 00:45
Ive read a setup somewhere.
with 15-17 hands that are 4252,2425 they open strong Nt and with 2452,4225 they open normally.
1D------1S
3S (stiff H) inv
1D-----1S
3H (fragment =stiff clubs) inv+
1C----1S
3red (fragment = stiff in the other red) inv+
1C----1S
3S (4225) inv
with 2425 they open 1Nt
1C----1H
3H (stiff D)
1C----1H
3D (stiff S)
1D----1H
there is no gadget.
Im not fond of offshapes Nt openings but showing the stiff economically is fun.
with 15-17 hands that are 4252,2425 they open strong Nt and with 2452,4225 they open normally.
1D------1S
3S (stiff H) inv
1D-----1S
3H (fragment =stiff clubs) inv+
1C----1S
3red (fragment = stiff in the other red) inv+
1C----1S
3S (4225) inv
with 2425 they open 1Nt
1C----1H
3H (stiff D)
1C----1H
3D (stiff S)
1D----1H
there is no gadget.
Im not fond of offshapes Nt openings but showing the stiff economically is fun.
From Psych "I mean, Gus and I never see eye-to-eye on work stuff.
For instance, he doesn't like being used as a human shield when we're being shot at.
I happen to think it's a very noble way to meet one's maker, especially for a guy like him.
Bottom line is we never let that difference of opinion interfere with anything."
For instance, he doesn't like being used as a human shield when we're being shot at.
I happen to think it's a very noble way to meet one's maker, especially for a guy like him.
Bottom line is we never let that difference of opinion interfere with anything."
Page 1 of 1