X and 4♠ are super duper obvious.
For the record, you hold Qx, x, 109xxxx, xxxx or better yet Qx, 109xxxx, x, xxxx, and the auction starts with partner and goes 1♠-(2♣)-P-(3♣)-X-(P)-?, are we definitely missing our decent slam? I know this is a wild construction but...
How do you treat this? What's the best continuation?
#21
Posted 2011-January-31, 14:27
I once yelled at my partner for discarding the 'wrong' card when he was subjected to a squeeze that I allowed by giving the wrong count with too high a card. Now he's allowed to pitch aces when the opponents have the king in the dummy. At trick 2. When he could have followed suit. And blame me.
East4Evil ♥ sohcahtoa 4ever!!!!!1
East4Evil ♥ sohcahtoa 4ever!!!!!1
#22
Posted 2011-January-31, 16:38
kayin801, on 2011-January-31, 14:27, said:
X and 4♠ are super duper obvious.
For the record, you hold Qx, x, 109xxxx, xxxx or better yet Qx, 109xxxx, x, xxxx, and the auction starts with partner and goes 1♠-(2♣)-P-(3♣)-X-(P)-?, are we definitely missing our decent slam? I know this is a wild construction but...
For the record, you hold Qx, x, 109xxxx, xxxx or better yet Qx, 109xxxx, x, xxxx, and the auction starts with partner and goes 1♠-(2♣)-P-(3♣)-X-(P)-?, are we definitely missing our decent slam? I know this is a wild construction but...
Well, if I hold Qx 109xxxx x xxxx I'm not bidding 3S over partner's double. That's a good 4H bid.
With Qx x 109xxxx xxxx I'll probably bid 4C to look for the best game.