I hope you agree with the double, what now?
1354 22count
#1
Posted 2011-June-10, 00:08
I hope you agree with the double, what now?
(still learning)
"At last: just calm down, this kind of disrupted boards happens every day in our bridge community. It will always be an inherent part of bridge until we move to a modern platform, and then will we have other hopefully less frequent issues." P Swennson
#2
Posted 2011-June-10, 00:17
#3
Posted 2011-June-10, 00:31
(still learning)
"At last: just calm down, this kind of disrupted boards happens every day in our bridge community. It will always be an inherent part of bridge until we move to a modern platform, and then will we have other hopefully less frequent issues." P Swennson
#4
Posted 2011-June-10, 01:46
-- Bertrand Russell
#5
Posted 2011-June-10, 03:27
wyman, on 2012-May-04, 09:48, said:
rbforster, on 2012-May-20, 21:04, said:
My YouTube Channel
#6
Posted 2011-June-10, 06:44
#7
Posted 2011-June-10, 08:17
jillybean, on 2011-June-10, 00:31, said:
No. It shows a hand too strong to overcall, but that doesn't mean it's good enough to force to game opposite nothing. If you want to force, you have to cue.
#8
Posted 2011-June-10, 09:01
I still like my bid, I think an initial 3N is too unilateral.
(still learning)
"At last: just calm down, this kind of disrupted boards happens every day in our bridge community. It will always be an inherent part of bridge until we move to a modern platform, and then will we have other hopefully less frequent issues." P Swennson
#9
Posted 2011-June-10, 09:57
jillybean, on 2011-June-10, 09:01, said:
I still like my bid, I think an initial 3N is too unilateral.
Partner should take another call over 3♦ on those cards. As has been stated above, double followed by 3♦ shows a very strong hand - one too strong to overcall 3♦. Given that a 3♦ overcall should be quite sound to begin with, double followed by 3♦ shows a VERY strong hand - just short of a game force. With a side Ace and four card support to the J, partner should not pass. In fact, partner should be thinking in terms of slam. It is not unreasonable for you to have the exact hand that you had (even without the ♠K) and slam has a lot of play. Game should definitely be bid, whether it is in NT or in diamonds.
#10
Posted 2011-June-10, 10:03
jillybean, on 2011-June-10, 09:01, said:
I still like my bid, I think an initial 3N is too unilateral.
3D may be too much of an underbid though, but certainly partner's pass was.
- hrothgar
#11
Posted 2011-June-10, 10:29
jillybean, on 2011-June-10, 09:01, said:
I still like my bid, I think an initial 3N is too unilateral.
He might bid 2♠ with the same hand but lacking the ♠A? Then 3♥ doesn't seem crazy/abnormal after your sequence. Lacking the ♠A 3NT could easily go down, so I stand by the 3♦ rebid.
wyman, on 2012-May-04, 09:48, said:
rbforster, on 2012-May-20, 21:04, said:
My YouTube Channel
#12
Posted 2011-June-10, 18:12
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."