Bidding approach
#21
Posted 2014-March-14, 05:32
#23
Posted 2014-March-14, 09:53
#24
Posted 2014-March-14, 11:04
Cyberyeti, on 2014-March-13, 03:16, said:
I don't really mind whether we reach the slam or not, but several decisions.
You kick off with 2♣, LHO bids 2♠ and partner passes showing a single negative type hand 4-7 ish.
Now 3♦ or 3♥ ?
I chose 3♥, LHO bid 3♠, partner bid 4♥, give up or have another go ?
I opted to ask keycards, partner shows none, now give up or ask for the Q ?
I asked for the Q, am I more likely to have 5 or 6 here, so is Jxxx enough to show the Q ? make my small diamond a small heart, I bid the same way and you probably want to show it. Partner entirely reasonably didn't show the Q, possibly coloured by the fact that he felt we were winning the match anyway and it wasn't going to be bid at the other table, 5♥+1 on a 2-2 break for a flat board.
Many play pass promises at least a random A or K and gf...so this hand could double to deny.
At this point if you prefer to be in slam whenever south has the QH I guess you could KC.
No I would not show the Q or extra length in this example hand. I would not play pard for some 2 loser hand at this point.
#25
Posted 2014-March-14, 16:21
#28
Posted 2014-March-14, 17:29
#29
Posted 2014-March-15, 01:03
Bid with 5-7 HCP.
Pass with 0-4 HCP
X with any 8+ HCP
A different approach is:
Bid with 5-7 HCP
Double with 0-4 HCP
Pass with 8+ HCP
Last option allows to trappassing more easily
So, I would suggest the following sequence:
1♥ (2♠) P P
3♠ (4 or less losers)
... 4♣
4♦ 4♥
4NT [RKCB(♥)]
... 5♣
5♦ (♥Q ask)
... 5♥ (no ♥Q)
decision time...
Odds: If dummy has xxxx needs 2-2, around 40% chance; if dummy has Jxxx 67%, if dummy has Qxxx 77%, if it has QJxx, then around 100%. Given opponent bids dummy is surely short in ♠. If it has some small honors, chances are that they are in ♣ and ♥. Being 8 ♥ cards outside (from declarers point of view), and 4 in dummy, it is 40% chance dummy has Q or J (10/50 each case), 30% dummy has QJ (15/50) and 30% dummy has no honor (15/50). So a guessing bid of 6♥ has a chance of success of (.67x.2 + .77x.2 + 1x.3) when opponents have a 2-2 or 3-1 split, i.e. about 58.8%. No extra for a 4-0 split as in that case you should always lose.
So, with no knowledge of (or tools to know) dummy's trump quality, the right action is to bid the slam.
*This answers the question of giving up or asking for the Q. Assuming p has 4 cards, if you have tools to ask before 5 ♥ then it is a must. If not your best shot is to bid the slam anyway.
If dummy might have xxx then probably best to make a Josephinelike 5♥ invitation. Parter should go on with Qxx or Jxxx or better.
If you open strong 2:
2♣ (2♠) Pass (0-4)
3♥ (3♠*) 4♥ *As posted, no wonder your p thought you were winning the match
4NT 5♣
5♦ (♥Q ask)
... 5♥
decision time again (See odds abovementioned)
As Fluffy quoted, in this sequence the ♥ suit will generally be 6th or longer, so Jxxx should respond as "Yes" to the Q ask.
But if you play an improuved TAB (Trump asking bid) after 0-4 HCP, such as:
5♣ = 0AKQ points
5♦ = Q
5♥= QJ
5♠ = K
5N = A or KJ (if an A is allowed in the 0-4HCP response)
After 5♣, 5♦ asks for the ♥J or, upon agreement, a K
then 4NT 5♣ = 0AKQ
5♦ TAB 5♠= ♥J or extra length
6♥ (thanks P) Pass (you are welcome)
I would like to ask readers if they had noticed that with just 1 entry to p hand (such as ♦10) 6♣ turns out to be a much solid contract. Probably no way to find it playing natural style.
It is pretty interesting to study Reese convention explained by Lovera. Although it seems to work fine with 1 suited hands mainly.
After opponents interfere, a jump in a suit sets the trump and asks Aces immediately. Then, another suit asks for K. Answer are positive only if dummy has 3 or more trumps and at least a K. In this hand Lovera proposes to jump to 4♦ establishing it, with 0-1-2-3 steps for 0-1-2-3 Aces, respectively; then asking for Ks. But that procedure does not solve the ♥ dilemma, immo.
A first improuvement could be to answer RKCB instead of plain Blk.
Another improuvement could be to use, after RKCB ask and answer, next no-suit as length/Q ask and other new suits as CAB and potential trump suit, if repeated.
What do you think?
#30
Posted 2014-March-15, 01:07
#31
Posted 2014-March-15, 01:32
Lovera, on 2014-March-15, 01:07, said:
Puo fare la correggione dela imprecisione per mezzo di re-editing la prima nota.
che e 4 ♦(4♠) Passo o Contro?
Perque 5 ♥ e interrogativi per i Re e non 4SA o 5 ♣?
#32
Posted 2014-March-15, 15:58
granguru, on 2014-March-15, 01:03, said:
<snip>
It is common expert style to...
Can you name any world class pair that uses your 1a+2 or 1b+2? Off the top of my head I am struggling to think of many for whom #2 alone is true and none at all when paired with either of your #1 schemes.
#33
Posted 2014-March-16, 14:51