void AQxx Kxxx Jxxxx
#1
Posted 2010-November-11, 15:19
void AQxx Kxxx Jxxxx
The auction continues 1H by LHO, 1S by partner, and pass back to me.
Do I pass or bid 1N?
All vul imps
#2
Posted 2010-November-11, 16:26
Edit: To expound further on this reasoning, if partner passes, we might be in trouble, but we have a 3N call if partner raises to 3♣, and a pass if partner bids 2♦, both of which are likely to be better contracts than 1N. I will pass over partner's 2♠ bid, and hope we survive, but I think an initial pass is just too cowardly when partner can have the cards with play for slam (picture QJxxxx x Ax AQT9, for example...
#5
Posted 2010-November-11, 16:54
I think it doesn't.
Let's say partner opened a Precision (limited 11-15) hand 1S. I'd certainly bid 1N now, wouldn't I?
And partner has come in vulnerable opposite a passed hand (so should have something approaching a Precision opener) and I'm not minimum for a Precision response.
#6
Posted 2010-November-11, 17:12
straube, on 2010-November-11, 16:54, said:
I think it doesn't.
Let's say partner opened a Precision (limited 11-15) hand 1S. I'd certainly bid 1N now, wouldn't I?
And partner has come in vulnerable opposite a passed hand (so should have something approaching a Precision opener) and I'm not minimum for a Precision response.
"Promises" is too strong a word. Partner can reasonably expect spade tolerance for the 1N bid -- extreme shape like this and a hand that wants to advance as well is more of an exception.
Also, I don't think that the analogy about the 1♠ opening - 1N holds up too well -- the situations are very different and opposite a PH, pard can bid 1♠ (instead of say 2♠) for a variety of tactical reasons...
#7
Posted 2010-November-11, 19:02
CSGibson, on 2010-November-11, 16:26, said:
Edit: To expound further on this reasoning, if partner passes, we might be in trouble, but we have a 3N call if partner raises to 3♣, and a pass if partner bids 2♦, both of which are likely to be better contracts than 1N. I will pass over partner's 2♠ bid, and hope we survive, but I think an initial pass is just too cowardly when partner can have the cards with play for slam (picture QJxxxx x Ax AQT9, for example...
I think 2C gives too much direction to the hand. 1N shows where are values are (hearts)and it preserves other options. I totally agree about pass being too conservative. It's also too unilateral. This hand can belong in either minor or NT as well as spades. I agree we can easily be on for a minor suit game or slam.
#8
Posted 2010-November-11, 19:34
Quote
Also, I don't think that the analogy about the 1♠ opening - 1N holds up too well -- the situations are very different and opposite a PH, pard can bid 1♠ (instead of say 2♠) for a variety of tactical reasons...
It sounds like you're saying that a hand like this is an exception that is permitted. If so, overcaller needs to be careful not to rebid 2S unless he has a good enough suit and a hand too good to have preempted 2S the first time.
#9
Posted 2010-November-11, 20:14
straube, on 2010-November-11, 19:34, said:
Bridge is a game of percentages. Overcaller should rebid 2♠ with 6+ ♠ if the hand warrants it without being overly concerned about advancer's void. Once again, overcaller may bid 1♠ or 2♠ for tactical reasons and one of them may be the suit quality.
Rarely, the hands will be a terrible misfit, but so what?
#10
Posted 2010-November-11, 21:00
We are all connected to each other biologically, to the Earth chemically, and to the rest of the universe atomically.
We're in the universe, and the universe is in us.
#11
Posted 2010-November-11, 21:12
straube, on 2010-November-11, 19:02, said:
Actually, I thinking too much in the context of a system that allows opening this hand .
I do agree that P is taking too much of a position and will change my preference to 2C / 1N in that order. Thinking of slam is way out there IMO, but a better partscore (hopefully) and a somewhat unlikely game do come to mind...
#12
Posted 2010-November-11, 22:38
Winner - BBO Challenge bracket #6 - February, 2017.
#13
Posted 2010-November-11, 23:23
foobar said:
Rarely, the hands will be a terrible misfit, but so what?
If the suit quality is the concern, one should be more reluctant to rebid 2S after partner has denied a fit than to bid 2S immediately when partner has not denied a fit.
foobar, on 2010-November-11, 21:12, said:
I do agree that P is taking too much of a position and will change my preference to 2C / 1N in that order. Thinking of slam is way out there IMO, but a better partscore (hopefully) and a somewhat unlikely game do come to mind...
Yay (at least for 1N). But remember the whole point of discussing what to do with --- AQxx Kxxx Jxxxx was to show that 1N did not promise tolerance for spades. From the other thread...
foobar said:
straube said:
I don't see why pard's 2S gives any "permission" to bid 3S.
1) Advancer was PH and overcaller should be given leeway to bid tactically
2) Advancer's 1N already conveyed the strength of the hand (and obstensibly ♠ tolerance) and allowed pard to bid 2♠
3) It would be wrong to compete even with the alternative hand for the same reasons
I'm concerned about the word "tactically". Are you referring to suit quality or are you talking about bidding light? We are vulnerable, 1S has taken up almost no room and thus was not bid to put pressure on the opponents (like say a 2D overcall might). A lead-direct shows little profit when the opponents play hearts. Partner is a limited hand and is as likely to risk an overbid as an underbid since "partner will know that I'm stretching". It seems that the overcaller has pretty good reasons to have his bid here.
I think if one overcalls 1S on AQxxxx xxx Kxx K then that is a reasonable action which obviously has support. The trouble I have is the rebid of 2S after partner's 1N call. I would prefer a pass with this hand the second time around. If the claim is made that "this is a hand too good to preempt and it's a rebiddable suit opposite a non-fitting hand" then I disagree but have some sympathy; it's not a bad hand even if it's not a very good hand (and it does have losers in the opponent's suits). If the claim is made that "1N showed tolerance for spades and I can bid 2S without fearing that partner will compete further" then I think that's wrong.
Consider passing the hand around. Reserve that direct 2S rebid for something better and directional. It looks like a misfit, but partner may surprise by supporting with Kx of spades. If he doesn't, perhaps the opponents are in a bad spot.
#14
Posted 2010-November-12, 00:03
straube, on 2010-November-11, 23:23, said:
I'm concerned about the word "tactically". Are you referring to suit quality or are you talking about bidding light? We are vulnerable, 1S has taken up almost no room and thus was not bid to put pressure on the opponents (like say a 2D overcall might). A lead-direct shows little profit when the opponents play hearts. Partner is a limited hand and is as likely to risk an overbid as an underbid since "partner will know that I'm stretching". It seems that the overcaller has pretty good reasons to have his bid here.
Tactically simply means that pard is allowed to take liberties, especially playing a system that allows such light openings.
Pard's is allowed to vary preempts and overcalls based on state of the match, opponents' tendencies or just to mix things up. Having made a bid that conveys the combined potential of the hands, advancer shouldn't read much into why partner chose to bid one way or the other...
#15
Posted 2010-November-12, 01:05
#16
Posted 2010-November-15, 01:06
It falls as 1NT on the ground.
-1NT does not waranth 2 card ♠
-2♣ is 5+,f1 and will create at least 1 round forcing auction with Jxxxx ♣
-1NT promisses a limit hand (which i have) and ♥ stopper(s) which i have.
Yes i wish i had a bit more balanced hand or at least 1♠ for my bid, but 1NT fits most to my extreme hand vs a ♠ overcall.
EDIT: i just saw i am a passed hand. So i have more sympathy to 2♣ bid, but i would still bid 1 NT. Disregard my second explenation above.
"It's only when a mosquito lands on your testicles that you realize there is always a way to solve problems without using violence!"
"Well to be perfectly honest, in my humble opinion, of course without offending anyone who thinks differently from my point of view, but also by looking into this matter in a different perspective and without being condemning of one's view's and by trying to make it objectified, and by considering each and every one's valid opinion, I honestly believe that I completely forgot what I was going to say."
#17
Posted 2010-November-15, 01:07
So this leaves 1NT.
With kind regards
Marlowe
Uwe Gebhardt (P_Marlowe)
#18
Posted 2010-November-15, 06:09
Responses other than pass mystify me.
I have a misfit 10: unclaimed clubs J; HQ under 1H opening. A+K working.
Y'all must allow 1S on 17-18 -- just to have hope of some making higher contract.
Even 19-20 because this is so-o-o likely a misfit.
I play 1S is near a minimum opener if a fit is found -- more starts T/O Dbl.
Plus I allow much leeway when 1S overcall jumps over 1H (not here).
Some leeway for S>H as in this auction as 2S>2H, 3S>3H, 4S>4H often cheap.
#19
Posted 2010-November-15, 07:25