Swiss teams, playing 5CM strong NT, not 2/1, 1♣ opening could be short. What do you do here?
Difficult competitive situation
#1
Posted 2023-June-19, 04:14
Swiss teams, playing 5CM strong NT, not 2/1, 1♣ opening could be short. What do you do here?
#2
Posted 2023-June-19, 04:47
#3
Posted 2023-June-19, 04:54
#5
Posted 2023-June-19, 06:52
[Edit: written a minute before now what]
#6
Posted 2023-June-19, 06:57
AL78, on 2023-June-19, 06:51, said:
I pass again, with same reasoning.
#7
Posted 2023-June-19, 07:35
AL78, on 2023-June-19, 06:51, said:
Now what?
Pass.
At IMPs ob., at MP you could bid 4C, ..., you have a 9 card fit, partner will have no
wastage in spades, I am not to afraid of defending 4S.
Uwe Gebhardt (P_Marlowe)
#8
Posted 2023-June-19, 08:33
#9
Posted 2023-June-19, 08:56
We have 5♣ on. Thankfully teammates found 4♠ and made it which brought in a few imps, but I was wondering if anyone would have taken any action in the auction on my hand. It is yet another hand where opps compete to the three level and I get squeezed out.
#10
Posted 2023-June-19, 09:26
Partner bid 3C voluntarily after you passed over 1S. He (or she) has at least 6 decent clubs and values in the red suits.
Then the opps bid to 3S. They have a minimum of eight and more often nine spades.
What does your partner’s hand look like?
More importantly, where are your values and how well do you think they mesh with partner’s?
Every card you have is ‘working’.
Weak hands with working cards should be upgraded. Stronger hands with values known not to be ‘working’ should be downgraded.
Change your hand slightly…make it Qxxx QJx Kxxx xx, and I’d happily pass 3S. On your actual hand 4C is clear and I’d be worried about missing game. However, I’m not sure I’d be able to bid 5C over 3S. Sometimes opps bid to 3S with only 8 spades between them.
Passing 3S shows a lack of understanding of how to listen to and interpret the bidding…and/or a lack of understanding of how to evaluate working cards.
#11
Posted 2023-June-19, 13:14
#12
Posted 2023-July-10, 09:21
mikeh, on 2023-June-19, 09:26, said:
I agree with everything else, but I would bid 5♣ thinking that 6♣ is possible (Partner could have ♥A in addition to actual hand), but not biddable.
#13
Posted 2023-July-11, 02:22
#14
Posted 2023-July-11, 02:28
Uwe Gebhardt (P_Marlowe)
#15
Posted 2023-July-12, 02:38