Spades.
#3
Posted 2010-December-13, 20:47
very close second choice 2h.
-
as south I would have opened 1s btw. pard will never play me for a hand this good.
#4
Posted 2010-December-13, 21:33
I play 3♠ as weak hands and looong suit (good 6 or 7+), nothing much on side suit.
What if pd's hand is double-bid hand? maybe there is a slam...
#5
Posted 2010-December-13, 22:49
#6
Posted 2010-December-13, 23:00
Restart discussions about the American vs European versions interpretations of 3♠ please. Even if I played 3♠ to be 5 spades + an invite, I can't believe this is the right hand for it.
Winner - BBO Challenge bracket #6 - February, 2017.
#8
Posted 2010-December-14, 01:40
_________________
Valiant were the efforts of the declarer // to thwart the wiles of the defender // however, as the cards lay // the contract had no play // except through the eyes of a kibitzer.
#9
Posted 2010-December-14, 02:01
(And yes, 3S is preemptive in my part of the world, but I am not good enough for it if it's strong.)
#10
Posted 2010-December-14, 02:32
#11
Posted 2010-December-14, 03:41
2♥ has some merit but I also don't really see the point.
#12
Posted 2010-December-14, 05:03
#14
Posted 2010-December-14, 09:49
mtvesuvius, on 2010-December-13, 19:25, said:
It of course depends on your response structure. With this particular hand I would venture 3♠ hoping for extra benefit from the long ♠ to offset the Q♥ not pulling full weight. If the AQ were in the minors this would be an easy call but I can understand others only choosing 2♠ which I would probably choose as well if NV.
EDIT : I find the 4♠ bidders LOL as many would say ♠KQx ♥xx♦Kxxx♣Kxxx is a clear TOX in this auction, Well more power to them. Personally I can never manage to have my cake and eat it too but I guess they figured out how to manage that as well.
the Freman, Chani from the move "Dune"
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it."
George Bernard Shaw
#15
Posted 2010-December-14, 09:52
Winner - BBO Challenge bracket #6 - February, 2017.
#16
Posted 2010-December-14, 13:58
Phil, on 2010-December-13, 23:00, said:
Restart discussions about the American vs European versions interpretations of 3♠ please. Even if I played 3♠ to be 5 spades + an invite, I can't believe this is the right hand for it.
Agree with restarting discussions. To me this is an obvious 3♠ and I can't remember ever holding the preemptive one.
#17
Posted 2010-December-14, 14:26
#18
Posted 2010-December-14, 14:30
the hog, on 2010-December-13, 22:49, said:
Who doesn't? I thought cue-bid with a hand too strong for a single jump was normal in Acol as well as American styles, but I don't have a book handy. Anyway, 3♠ is certainly not appropriate in SAYC or 2/1 bidding.
#19
Posted 2010-December-15, 09:33
lexlogan, on 2010-December-14, 14:30, said:
I believe the rest of the world, but I can't say it confidently.
This is a pretty obvious 3♠ on my style (Spain), wich is french style also. So sad we don't have many Italians speaking english here (missing Mauro), I am sure they would give us an interesting different look to many situations
#20
Posted 2010-December-15, 09:58
lexlogan, on 2010-December-14, 14:30, said:
I used to think the standard in Acol was to bid as though raising partner's opening bid, so 3♠ is a limit raise. However I've learned from previous discussions of this nature that there's some variation in understanding.
The one Acol-based book I found then that discusses it explicitly, Sally Brock's "Double Trouble", doesn't play the double jump as pre-emptive.
London UK