You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The auction can be analyzed in a couple of ways assuming that a direct double of 2 is takeout(likely) or penalty(unlikely). South misbid regardless.

Playing double as takeout passing 2 should either be a penalty pass or a balanced minimum . Unless playing roth-stone or fantunes the South hand is not minimum,isn't unbalanced, and should take action directly over 2 regardless by either doubling or bidding 3 or 3. I like those calls in the following order, (1)X (2)3 and (3)3. Following up your pass with a penalty double of 3 seems really strange on Qx. Using this assumption, North has made a clear slam try in hearts and South should be thinking about grand slam not passing 4. South has misbid the hand 3 times.

Playing double as penalty oriented, pass might be an option but seems wrong with a good 5422. The only wasted card is the Q and everything else is great, bidding 3 or 3 seems obvious. Double of 3 simply compounds the earlier pass so we don't count that as a second error here. North has an impossible problem over 3 and passing to try and get some help from partner seems correct. Now when partner has shown a minimum balanced hand there is no clear cut action and North signs off in 4. Using this premise South has misbid only once.
May 24, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I misclicked on the vote and would bid 2nt not 3nt. Seems normal and avoids some obvious problems for partner that 3 might create.
May 24, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would expect a hand similar to AKxx AKQxxx - xxx. Seems like an obvious 7 call. I don't really care if 7NT makes so there doesn't seem much reason to bid anything that would create a tempo situation and keep us from 7.
April 8, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There's an author who published a book recently, Gabriel Sherman. Perhaps there is some confusion.
April 5, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In NYC the regional events are mid-chart for events other than the limited games The club director determines what's allowed/not in club games.
Jan. 1, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Everyone has done a lot of bidding. We are vulnerable and they are not. Perhaps partner has some distributional hand with defense like KJ10xx x KJx xxxx and was being a little frisky. I don't know that we're beating 5 but it's hard to make a slam off 3 aces. I hope partner would double 5 with defensive values(keep me from bidding out) and pass with more offensive values(planning to double 5 with slam interest and pass with garbage).
Dec. 4, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't see anything wrong with 4 other than revealing too much about the hand. The alternative is to bid 6 directly over 3. Once you choose a slow route 4 is as good as any other bid and might get you to 7.
Oct. 2, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My plan is to bid 6. Why not clue partner in that Kxx ? Qxxxx ? is worth bidding 7.
Oct. 2, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I've been playing a similar structure based on Roth-Stone. My regular partner and I changed to stronger 2-level openings after the world open pairs in Philadelphia. We were playing aggressive weak two openings but found that had two flaws against strong opponents. The first was that the openings showed no gain or a loss for the event. The second flaw was lighter distributional openings that weren't able to get into the auction safely after passing.

Using 2-level openings as light distributional hands causes the reverse problem for the opponents and allows us to pressure them instead. We've given up weak two bids but feel those were neutral at best.

There are a couple of hand types which give us problems and one of those is a hand with both majors. I can certainly understand the temptation to assign a specific bid to show that hand type but we've chosen not to. I'm not certain of the specific numbers but a natural 2D call is more frequent than a hand with majors. On the plus side we have less complexity and fewer system errors than we would otherwise have. As an earlier poster mentioned partner will frequently know what to do in competitive auctions.
Oct. 2, 2013
David Gurvich edited this comment Oct. 2, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Pass is more attractive against some extremely light overcalls. I've been seeing 5-8 point 4-card overcalls.
Aug. 21, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I read your comment to my wife and she completely agreed as she has experienced similar situations. She does think that being courteous and kind is right, regardless of the outcome. She is not as optimistic in thinking that people will change how they act.
Aug. 19, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Not sure that this makes sense. How light is this double? 11+6 might not be enough to defeat even 3 when opener is playing a 3-3 fit in 1X. Even beating the contract one might not be good.
Aug. 18, 2013
David Gurvich edited this comment Aug. 18, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
A normal treatment of 3 is a spade slam try not promising shortness unless discussed. There are no details given indicating that 3 guarantees any particular distribution.
Aug. 17, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The hand has significant holes. I don't mind the 4 bid and consider that enough indication of slam interest. There is no need to make a slam try beyond 4 as partner will bid on when only control and aces are all that is needed. I would bid 6 after a 5 cuebid.
Aug. 17, 2013
David Gurvich edited this comment Aug. 17, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm willing to upgrade even without discussion. The main danger is that partner will pass. A similar hand where I doubled led to +200 instead of 6 +1370. Partner had everyones pass with short spades and heart length, similar to x A10xxx 10xxx Axx
Aug. 15, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Everytime that the opps are playing specific 2-suited michaels overcalls I get bad results on these hands. I keep intending to incorporate some such structure but have been unwilling to give up the bid that would be lost. Perhaps the gain is worth the infrequency considering the nearly 100% positive results.
Aug. 15, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Looked like a 3 call with no agreements. My only worry is that I have better than partner might expect with a very good suit and K. We might miss a great slam. I'm almost tempted to bid 4.
Aug. 15, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The system I play with my regular partner is based on Roth-Stone. This hand would be a pass in 1st seat. We do miss partscores sometimes but rarely games or slams.
Aug. 15, 2013
David Gurvich edited this comment Aug. 15, 2013
.

Bottom Home Top