♠9xx
♥KQJ
♦A10x
♣109xx
NS vul
1♣!-ps-1♦!-ps
1♠-ps-ps-??
1♣= polish club
1♦= 0-6 (7)
1♠ is either 4 cards on 12-14 bal or 17-19 5+
Page 1 of 1
another vulnerable reopening
#3
Posted 2010-June-24, 13:47
Would partner have bid already with a strong notrump?
Assuming that he would have, it seems likely that LHO is strong, RHO is very weak, and partner has about a 10-count. If so, I'm not sure what good bidding will do - the red-suit tricks will probably be as useful in 1♠ as they will in 1NT, and it doesn't seem that we have any source of tricks (though partner might have five clubs).
Looking at in another way, I'm sub-minimim for a balancing 1NT, I have no spade stop, and my values are all defensive. I pass.
Assuming that he would have, it seems likely that LHO is strong, RHO is very weak, and partner has about a 10-count. If so, I'm not sure what good bidding will do - the red-suit tricks will probably be as useful in 1♠ as they will in 1NT, and it doesn't seem that we have any source of tricks (though partner might have five clubs).
Looking at in another way, I'm sub-minimim for a balancing 1NT, I have no spade stop, and my values are all defensive. I pass.
... that would still not be conclusive proof, before someone wants to explain that to me as well as if I was a 5 year-old. - gwnn
#4
Posted 2010-June-24, 14:07
My understanding of Polish club is that opener could actually have a 3-card major here if he happens to be 3235, and responder might not pass with less than 3-card support.
I agree with gnasher that partner's inaction on the hand makes LHO quite likely to hold the 17-19 5!♠ hand. It seems like responder didn't know this when he passed 1♠ (opener could still have 12-14 balanced with 4♠ pretty easily).
So I am passing 1♠ not because I like my defensive prospects, but because I don't like my offensive prospects (partner didnt X 1♠) and I am a little worried that my opponents are cold for 4♠.
I agree with gnasher that partner's inaction on the hand makes LHO quite likely to hold the 17-19 5!♠ hand. It seems like responder didn't know this when he passed 1♠ (opener could still have 12-14 balanced with 4♠ pretty easily).
So I am passing 1♠ not because I like my defensive prospects, but because I don't like my offensive prospects (partner didnt X 1♠) and I am a little worried that my opponents are cold for 4♠.
#5
Posted 2010-June-24, 15:34
Yeah this isn't a particularly precise auction, I would let it go. They may well be in the wrong strain.
Most play that opener could be 4♠5m and strong too, sure that wasn't the case?
Most play that opener could be 4♠5m and strong too, sure that wasn't the case?
#6
Posted 2010-June-25, 15:10
another boring pass...
Kind Regards
Roland
Sanity Check: Failure (Fluffy)
More system is not the answer...
Roland
Sanity Check: Failure (Fluffy)
More system is not the answer...
#7
Posted 2010-June-25, 15:35
I saw this thread yesterday and am still trying to figure out what about our hand makes anyone want to declare anything.
Please let me know about any questions or interest or bug reports about GIB.
#8
Posted 2010-June-25, 17:03
we have 7 tricks in 1NT, they have 7 tricks in 1♠, I doubled and partner bid 1NT, but LHO had redoubled before, and RHO found a double with ♦Kxxxx and out... partner retreated to 2♦X for -500
Page 1 of 1

Help
