[mike777]

unfav vul imps


1c=(1s)=2d=(3s)
p==p===?


AQ5....AJ65....AQJ53....9



[edit by inquiry. I have been informed that this is Problem 7 Set 244 in BRIDGE magazine, reported in the May 2011 edition pp52,53. Please avoid from posting copyrighted material in hte forums. It is true that a hand or deal can not be copyrighted, but in these cases, it is proper to give proper attribution. ]

[rogerclee]

Kind of a brutal hand, I would start with a double. If partner bids 4C I would like to think that 4N is natural, since 4H and 4S should both be club cuebids, but I'm not sure. I don't think a direct 4N is natural.

[aguahombre]

rogerclee, on 2011-April-28, 20:55, said:

Kind of a brutal hand, I would start with a double. If partner bids 4C I would like to think that 4N is natural, since 4H and 4S should both be club cuebids, but I'm not sure. I don't think a direct 4N is natural.

This is exactly right for the majority. For the few who have 2♦ as unconditional game force, there are complications.

Opener would have bid 4♣with 7 of them.

Opener has only one spade and did not support diamonds. If she has three diamonds, her hand is weak.

With 1-4-2-6 and a respectable opener, a double related to Snapdragon could have been used.

So, if 2♦ was G.F, then 3NT here seems the practical bid, also allowing for the unlikely possibility that pard has two spades.

If not, then Roger's reopening double must be right with this mountain responding hand.

[NickRW]

I don't know what is especially "british" about this hand or sequence, but X seems normal to me.

[aguahombre]

NickRW, on 2011-April-29, 09:17, said:

I don't know what is especially "british" about this hand or sequence,

Implying that 2-4-3-4 would open one heart? Dunno. Am on wrong side of pond.

[gnasher]

I expect Mike means that his opponents understand the benefits of preemptive bidding.

[RMB1]

You can read more opinions on this problem in BRIDGE magazine May 2011, pages 52+53.

[aguahombre]

Don't suppose B.M., or parts of it, is on line?

[aguahombre]

gnasher, on 2011-April-29, 09:51, said:

I expect Mike means that his opponents understand the benefits of preemptive bidding.

That might be an interesting thread. Over here, opponents at the lower levels certainly don't; especially when it comes to raising the preempt.

[Hanoi5]

What's wrong with 3NT? I would have preferred to double 1♠ but since I didn't I can only choose NT now. Maybe 4NT or just 6NT is correct? I'm not feeling the slam is on with the interventor behind my 3 aces.

[Cyberyeti]

aguahombre, on 2011-April-29, 09:39, said:

Implying that 2-4-3-4 would open one heart? Dunno. Am on wrong side of pond.

Or 1N weak ?

I play a warped form of british acol, and open 1♣/1♥ depending on who I'm playing with if outside the 1N range with that shape.

Double is an easy starter here, but I'm wondering if the point of saying "british acol" is 4 card+ club and possibly opened lighter than some people do.

[AlexJonson]

I'm not sure why anyone thinks 2D is systematically GF - didn't he just think with his huge hand and spades
that he could go naturally and slowly, only to be disappointed...

[bluecalm]

I have already screw up by not doubling round before. 2♦ should deny 4 hearts.
Now there is no way partner will ever believe I have 4 heart so I just bid 4NT cause it looks like what I have - strong balanced hand with ♠ stopper.
If play this as blackwood then it's time to bid 3NT and promptly apologize to partner for not doubling round before and change our agreements regarding 4NT.

[han]

Strongly agree with 2D. Now double.

[whereagles]

Pard won't have a med hand (he would have acted over 3♠), so he's probably min. I'll go quietly with 3NT then.

[mfa1010]

Double. Can't bring myself to bid just 3NT with this much.

If partner takes it out to 4♣/4♦, I would interpret 4NT as RKC, 4♠ as cuebid (last train) and 4♥ as natural trying for a 4-3.

So if partner bids 4♣ after the double, we are in trouble. I would try 4♦ after that, atleast if partner does have ♦Kx we should play excellent in diamonds.