I was south and was thinking that my partner has to have values somewhere and clearly has short ♦ to bid 4♦ with no keycards. I could have bid 6♦ as a further probe, but if partner has ♣Kxxxx, the ♠K is irrelevant. The finesse in ♠ lost, and we lost 17 IMPs. Obviously playing kickback would have helped some, but we are an infrequent partnership and wanted to avoid any mishaps with kickback.
ATB over-bidding or poor luck?
#1
Posted 2012-January-30, 10:12
I was south and was thinking that my partner has to have values somewhere and clearly has short ♦ to bid 4♦ with no keycards. I could have bid 6♦ as a further probe, but if partner has ♣Kxxxx, the ♠K is irrelevant. The finesse in ♠ lost, and we lost 17 IMPs. Obviously playing kickback would have helped some, but we are an infrequent partnership and wanted to avoid any mishaps with kickback.
#2
Posted 2012-January-30, 10:21
You get the blame.
#3
Posted 2012-January-30, 10:32
Yes Partner has few HCPS for his bid, but the great shape and the void are so big upsides that he was right to bid the way he did.
Roland
Sanity Check: Failure (Fluffy)
More system is not the answer...
#4
Posted 2012-January-30, 10:38
EDIT: Just checked the K&R evaluator and it puts your hand at 24.4!
Therefore something like:
2NT - 3♥
3♠ - 4♦
4♥ - 4NT(♠)
5♦ - 6♠
does not seem unreasonable. Or,
2♣ - 2♠
3♥ - 4♥
followed by an asking sequence and 6♥. As you point out Kickback is most useful for this.
#5
Posted 2012-January-30, 10:39
If you want to find out about the black kings, cue-bidding would work better:
4♠-5♣
5♦-5♥
6♣
This post has been edited by gnasher: 2012-January-30, 10:43
#6
Posted 2012-January-30, 10:44
#7
Posted 2012-January-30, 10:45
-- make a ♥Q-ask BELOW 5H or
-- make a specific K-ask with 5S ( thus allowing patner to bid 5NT with the ♠K .
So, on this hand:
1H - ( 3D ) - 4D! - ( X )
XX - 4H [ no further interference ]
4S! - 5C ( 2nd step = 0/3 )
5D ( next step = ♥ Q-ask ) - 6C ( ♥Q + ♣K, denying ♠K ; 5NT would show ♥Q + ♠K )
TWOferBRIDGE
"imo by far in bridge the least understood concept is how to bid over a jump-shift
( 1M-1NT!-3m-?? )." ....Justin Lall
" Did someone mention relays? " .... Zelandakh
K-Rex to Mikeh : " Sometimes you drive me nuts " .
#8
Posted 2012-January-30, 10:46
#9
Posted 2012-January-30, 10:53
#11
Posted 2012-January-30, 12:08
aguahombre, on 2012-January-30, 10:53, said:
Its about 57% if opponets are 100% to be in small slam.
#13
Posted 2012-January-30, 14:08
For instance, he doesn't like being used as a human shield when we're being shot at.
I happen to think it's a very noble way to meet one's maker, especially for a guy like him.
Bottom line is we never let that difference of opinion interfere with anything."
#14
Posted 2012-January-30, 14:34
In short matches, -17 may be too much of a risk against typical opponents. Check it out and go for certainty.
However if the A/E game has become so tight and mathematical, go for it.
#15
Posted 2012-January-30, 14:40
But, that's just me.
#17
Posted 2012-January-30, 17:18
more info. The point if bidding 6d is that you want to go for
7 but need something else to make it happen. It also needs to
be fairly obvious. Your side has all of the key cards and trump
Q and club K yet p is still searching. You having a dia void
cannot be the key so the only logical solution to the 6d question
is do you have the spade K or no. If p needed queens they should
not have blackwooded but cue bid more:)
#18
Posted 2012-January-30, 22:48
1) Partner has ♣Kxxxx in which case the ♠K is irrelevant
2) Partner has ♠QJ and the K is with the NON-preemptor
I would break even when partner had ♠K
and I would only lose if I was on a hook into the preemptor AND it lost.
The full hand was as follows:
As can be seen, E-W have an 800 point sacrifice into 1430. Our teammates did not manage this sacrifice, however if the ♠A was in the opposite hand, they were risking losing 13 (assuming we were in 6) vs winning 8 (since now -1100 vs -1460).
Broze, I find it contradictory to tell me that the K&R evaluator (which is a frequent reference tool for me as well) evaluates my hand as 24.4, and then suggest an auction beginning with 2NT. Also, the auction you suggested that begins opening 2NT assumes some non-standard agreements; it is not "standard" here for 2NT-3R// 3M-4X to be a cue-bid, but rather as natural.
The auction at the other table was:
Our teammates said that South never thought of re-raising and their auction shows how much harder it was for them when they opened 2NT. If they had opened 2♣, the auction would have continued (3♦)-3♠-(4 or 5♦) to me. I doubt that anybody would know what to do at this point beyond guessing. Opening 1♥ put us in a much better position to know what to do later on.