Differentiating strong one suiters over opp's wk2
#1
Posted 2007-August-18, 11:50
-3♠
-4♠
-dbl, followed by 3♠ over partner's expected leb 2nt
-dbl, followed by 4♠
-3♥, followed by 4♠ (or what does this sequence mean if not some spade one-suiter, assume that a direct leap to 4m shows ♠ + minor)
#2
Posted 2007-August-18, 12:03
3S: AKJTxx xxx AKx x, AKxxxxx x AJx xx
4S: KQJxxxx x KQx AJ
X-then-3S: KQJxx x AKx KQJx, AQJxxx x AQx KQx
X-then-4S: AKJxxx x KQx AKx
3H-then-4S: AKQxxxx x KQx Ax
X followed by a spade bid never shows a true one-suiter.
#3 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2007-August-18, 12:47
Stephen Tu, on Aug 18 2007, 12:50 PM, said:
-3♠
-4♠
-dbl, followed by 3♠ over partner's expected leb 2nt
-dbl, followed by 4♠
-3♥, followed by 4♠ (or what does this sequence mean if not some spade one-suiter, assume that a direct leap to 4m shows ♠ + minor)
3S- AKJxxx xx KJx Ax
4S- AKJxxxx xx AKx x
X then 3S- could be a lot of hands but the key is flexibility. KQxxxx x AKx AJx, KQxxx x AKxx AQx, Kxxxxx x AKQx AQ would all apply.
X then 4S- AKQxxx x KQx AKx.
3H then 4S... no idea tbh.
#4
Posted 2007-August-18, 13:25
#5
Posted 2007-August-19, 12:34
- hrothgar
#6
Posted 2007-August-19, 14:32
Hannie, on Aug 19 2007, 08:34 PM, said:
Quibbles is the word.
Harald
#7
Posted 2007-August-19, 15:17
Hannie, on Aug 19 2007, 01:34 PM, said:
Weren't his examples 4 and 3 losers, respectively? looks like 9 tricks!
#8
Posted 2007-August-19, 15:23
- hrothgar
#9
Posted 2007-August-19, 15:50
jdonn, on Aug 18 2007, 02:25 PM, said:
I also play this way, i.e. cuebid is nominally stopper asking for 3NT with a solid minor but could be solid spades or various other very strong single suited hands. I believe this is not expert standard however, so make sure you agree with your partner before trying the cuebid with solid spades.
Remember that over 2♥, 3♥ is basically your only forcing bid if you're unwilling to see partner sit for your double. (well, I guess higher NT and heart bids are forcing to, but those are 2-suiters)
#10
Posted 2007-August-19, 18:09
The idea being that some, rare, hands are too good for either 3♠ or 4♠ and too declarer-oriented to risk double... not to mention the 'flexibility' that double then bid usually connotes.
I remember thinking 'what a good idea' and then promptly forgot it until reading this thread.
#11
Posted 2007-August-19, 20:06
mikeh, on Aug 19 2007, 06:09 PM, said:
The idea being that some, rare, hands are too good for either 3♠ or 4♠ and too declarer-oriented to risk double... not to mention the 'flexibility' that double then bid usually connotes.
I remember thinking 'what a good idea' and then promptly forgot it until reading this thread.
Your memory is right, they earned a slam swing against the Italians I think. According to a reference elsewhere Nickell's hand was AKQJ9xx A x KTxx (I don't have the BW right here to check).
Fred posted some time ago here that 3H shouldn't be thought of as an asking bid (do you have a stopper?) but as a showing-bid (I have a solid suit plus some more). This makes this sequence very natural.