Help
You are South.
1) Do you agree with 1♥?
2) What do you do over 2♠?
What to do? IMP problem
#1
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 7,786
- Joined: 2004-September-05
- Gender:Male
- Location:Galloway NJ USA
-
Interests:Bridge, Poker, participatory and spectator sports.
Occupation - Tax Attorney in Atlantic City, NJ.
Posted 2008-June-09, 08:26
You are South.
1) Do you agree with 1♥?
2) What do you do over 2♠?
#2
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 2,502
- Joined: 2007-December-22
Posted 2008-June-09, 08:33
1) Agree with 1♥
2) Pass. Apologize if we missed a game, but we would have missed game by passing 1♦ too.
2) Pass. Apologize if we missed a game, but we would have missed game by passing 1♦ too.
That's impossible. No one can give more than one hundred percent. By definition that is the most anyone can give.
#3
- Limit bidder
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 8,482
- Joined: 2004-November-02
- Gender:Female
- Location:England
- Interests:Bridge, classical music, skiing... but I spend more time earning a living than doing any of those
Posted 2008-June-09, 08:43
i) No I would have passed 1D
ii) Bid 2NT. For me, 3♣ is fourth suit forcing, and I definitely have clubs stopped.
If I had a response systemically in my methods, and partner game forces, I don't then pass him out in 2S.
ii) Bid 2NT. For me, 3♣ is fourth suit forcing, and I definitely have clubs stopped.
If I had a response systemically in my methods, and partner game forces, I don't then pass him out in 2S.
#4 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2008-June-09, 08:55
It's close to a pass but this hand is (just) strong enough that I'm willing to bid 2N. If it was xxx xxxx x QJxxx I would pass.
#5
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 3,162
- Joined: 2006-July-10
- Gender:Male
- Location:Maryland
Posted 2008-June-09, 08:57
Agree/2NT. A good partner will then bid 3♠.
#6
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 9,151
- Joined: 2003-June-11
- Location:Southern California
Posted 2008-June-09, 09:01
I'm fine with 3♣. I'm not passing, even though it might be right.
"Phil" on BBO
#7
- 5-level belongs to me
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 9,128
- Joined: 2004-August-30
- Gender:Male
- Location:Glasgow Scotland
- Interests:Poems Computers
Posted 2008-June-09, 11:13
ArtK78, on Jun 9 2008, 09:26 AM, said:
Scoring: IMP
1♦ - 1♥
2♠ - ??
You are South.
1) Do you agree with 1♥?
2) What do you do over 2♠?
1♦ - 1♥
2♠ - ??
You are South.
1) Do you agree with 1♥?
2) What do you do over 2♠?
- _P = 10, 1♥ = 7.
- Now, _P = 10, 3N=7, 2N = 6.
For me 3♣ is 4th suit either asking for a stop or showing a good hand.
Edited after reading Olebergs post about fast arrival.
#8
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 17,847
- Joined: 2003-October-07
- Gender:Male
Posted 2008-June-09, 11:24
I would have passed 1d but it was close.
Given that we are vul, I have no 5 card major or other nice distributional features I pass.
Now I guess 2nt is forced, hate to pass 2s.
Given that we are vul, I have no 5 card major or other nice distributional features I pass.
Now I guess 2nt is forced, hate to pass 2s.
#9
- Brain Farts and Actual Farts Increasing with Age
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 9,586
- Joined: 2005-September-21
- Gender:Male
- Location:Lima, Allen County, North-West-Central Ohio, USA
- Interests:www.limadbc.blogspot.com editor/contributor
Posted 2008-June-09, 11:38
2NT for me.
I hate bidding to keep the auction open in case partner has a powerful hand and then passing when it turns out that he has a powerful hand.
I hate bidding to keep the auction open in case partner has a powerful hand and then passing when it turns out that he has a powerful hand.
"Gibberish in, gibberish out. A trial judge, three sets of lawyers, and now three appellate judges cannot agree on what this law means. And we ask police officers, prosecutors, defense lawyers, and citizens to enforce or abide by it? The legislature continues to write unreadable statutes. Gibberish should not be enforced as law."
-P.J. Painter.
-P.J. Painter.
#10
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 7,786
- Joined: 2004-September-05
- Gender:Male
- Location:Galloway NJ USA
-
Interests:Bridge, Poker, participatory and spectator sports.
Occupation - Tax Attorney in Atlantic City, NJ.
Posted 2008-June-09, 11:44
A number of posters passed the 2♠ rebid.
Are you aware that 2♠ is forcing? And, while extremely unlikely, could conceivably be made on a 3 card suit?
Are you aware that 2♠ is forcing? And, while extremely unlikely, could conceivably be made on a 3 card suit?
#11
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 13,704
- Joined: 2005-June-15
- Gender:Male
- Location:Canada
- Interests:Bridge, golf, wine (red), cooking, reading eclectically but insatiably, travelling, making bad posts.
Posted 2008-June-09, 11:49
I also would have passed: switch the round suits, and 1♥ is clear (to me, anyway).
Having scraped up a response, my choices seem to be a partnership violation of pass aor 2N, hoping to hear 3♣ (my view of ingberman or lebensohl here, and the two coincide on this auction, is that opener rebids 3♣ unless he cannot stand being passed there.. this hand type is a possibility)... if he rebids 3♦, well, we're not down yet.. and if he rebids 3♠... hmmmm.. I have to raise altho this may be a no-play game.....
I opt for 2N, since AKQxx x AKQxxx is possible, and the system violation is just too much to stomach... I'd consider passing only at mps.
Having scraped up a response, my choices seem to be a partnership violation of pass aor 2N, hoping to hear 3♣ (my view of ingberman or lebensohl here, and the two coincide on this auction, is that opener rebids 3♣ unless he cannot stand being passed there.. this hand type is a possibility)... if he rebids 3♦, well, we're not down yet.. and if he rebids 3♠... hmmmm.. I have to raise altho this may be a no-play game.....
I opt for 2N, since AKQxx x AKQxxx is possible, and the system violation is just too much to stomach... I'd consider passing only at mps.
'one of the great markers of the advance of human kindness is the howls you will hear from the Men of God' Johann Hari
#12
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 1,950
- Joined: 2008-April-05
- Gender:Male
- Location:Copenhagen
- Interests:Model-Railways.
Posted 2008-June-09, 13:36
Agree with 1♥, if I have an understanding partner. (I do.)
Some number of nt, whichever shows the worst hand, or at least a hand that sees no alternatives to 3nt as the final contract.
In my agreements it would be 3nt, as partner has gameforced.
If partner is 6-5 he should bid again.
Incidently, this hand is almost like the one from Michael Rosenbergs book. "Bridge, Zia and me", where he argues that passing a forcing bid is unethical.
I, and a few other guys, agree.
Some number of nt, whichever shows the worst hand, or at least a hand that sees no alternatives to 3nt as the final contract.
In my agreements it would be 3nt, as partner has gameforced.
If partner is 6-5 he should bid again.
Incidently, this hand is almost like the one from Michael Rosenbergs book. "Bridge, Zia and me", where he argues that passing a forcing bid is unethical.
I, and a few other guys, agree.
_____________________________________
Do not underestimate the power of the dark side. Or the ninth trumph.
Best Regards Ole Berg
_____________________________________
We should always assume 2/1 unless otherwise stated, because:
- If the original poster didn't bother to state his system, that means that he thinks it's obvious what he's playing. The only people who think this are 2/1 players.
Gnasher
Do not underestimate the power of the dark side. Or the ninth trumph.
Best Regards Ole Berg
_____________________________________
We should always assume 2/1 unless otherwise stated, because:
- If the original poster didn't bother to state his system, that means that he thinks it's obvious what he's playing. The only people who think this are 2/1 players.
Gnasher
#13 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2008-June-09, 14:48
OleBerg, on Jun 9 2008, 02:36 PM, said:
Incidently, this hand is almost like the one from Michael Rosenbergs book. "Bridge, Zia and me", where he argues that passing a forcing bid is unethical.
lol, serious question, is english your native language? I think you don't understand what the word "unethical" means, or what Rosenberg was talking about, or what anyone else has said (since no one has argued that it's unethical, just bad bridge).
#14 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2008-June-09, 14:54
mikeh, on Jun 9 2008, 12:49 PM, said:
I also would have passed: switch the round suits, and 1♥ is clear (to me, anyway).
Having scraped up a response, my choices seem to be a partnership violation of pass aor 2N, hoping to hear 3♣ (my view of ingberman or lebensohl here, and the two coincide on this auction, is that opener rebids 3♣ unless he cannot stand being passed there.. this hand type is a possibility)... if he rebids 3♦, well, we're not down yet.. and if he rebids 3♠... hmmmm.. I have to raise altho this may be a no-play game.....
I opt for 2N, since AKQxx x AKQxxx is possible, and the system violation is just too much to stomach... I'd consider passing only at mps.
Having scraped up a response, my choices seem to be a partnership violation of pass aor 2N, hoping to hear 3♣ (my view of ingberman or lebensohl here, and the two coincide on this auction, is that opener rebids 3♣ unless he cannot stand being passed there.. this hand type is a possibility)... if he rebids 3♦, well, we're not down yet.. and if he rebids 3♠... hmmmm.. I have to raise altho this may be a no-play game.....
I opt for 2N, since AKQxx x AKQxxx is possible, and the system violation is just too much to stomach... I'd consider passing only at mps.
This seems inconsistent. You're willing to pass 1D when partner might have AKQxx x AKQxxx x but you're not willing to pass 2S because he might have that hand. Aren't you risking playing partscore in both cases?
For those who don't think it can ever be right to respond and then pass the jump shift, I really disagree strongly.
When you respond you can be gambling on finding a fit in the suit you bid, or a different second suit, in which case you can have game. You are also hoping it's the opponents hand and you interfere with their bidding, and you are also hoping to find a better partial.
I really do not understand the people who were willing to pass 1D never being willing to pass a 2S JS. In both cases you're risking playing a partial when partner has game in hand. At least in the latter case we know we don't have a big fit anywhere (which is our primary chance for game), and we have gotten to a probably better partial.
I think this is a bad example of what I'm talking about since it is too strong, but what do people do with xxx Qxxxx --- xxxxx?
#15
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 13,704
- Joined: 2005-June-15
- Gender:Male
- Location:Canada
- Interests:Bridge, golf, wine (red), cooking, reading eclectically but insatiably, travelling, making bad posts.
Posted 2008-June-09, 14:56
ArtK78, on Jun 9 2008, 12:44 PM, said:
A number of posters passed the 2♠ rebid.
Are you aware that 2♠ is forcing? And, while extremely unlikely, could conceivably be made on a 3 card suit?
Are you aware that 2♠ is forcing? And, while extremely unlikely, could conceivably be made on a 3 card suit?
I can't think of a hand that would jumpshift into a 3 card spade suit: responder has not denied 4 spades, so this jumpshift may deprive opener of control of the auction. He would/should jumpshift into a short club suit rather than a short major in these circumstances.
'one of the great markers of the advance of human kindness is the howls you will hear from the Men of God' Johann Hari
#16
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 4,153
- Joined: 2003-May-14
Posted 2008-June-09, 15:00
Quote
lol, serious question, is english your native language? I think you don't understand what the word "unethical" means, or what Rosenberg was talking about, or what anyone else has said (since no one has argued that it's unethical, just bad bridge).
Rosenberg's argument was that those who sometimes choose to pass their partner's "forcing" bids often do so acting either subconsciously or consciously based on partner's hitches (whether micro-hitch or more substantial). So they get better results more often than they "should", absent the UI, e.g. they somehow stay low in the misfit but scrape up another bid when partner jump-shifted with a fit in responder's suit or the like.
And if they choose not to pass on a hand and it works out well, it's hard to argue that they should pass to be consistent, that bidding on was suggested by UI, since the bid was forcing!
So his claim is that the ethical way to behave is to always respect the force even if you stretched before.
Your opinion may vary.
#17
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 7,786
- Joined: 2004-September-05
- Gender:Male
- Location:Galloway NJ USA
-
Interests:Bridge, Poker, participatory and spectator sports.
Occupation - Tax Attorney in Atlantic City, NJ.
Posted 2008-June-09, 15:06
I realize that a jump shift on a 3 card major would be exceedingly rare, but how about this hand:
AKQ xx AKQJxx xx?
How would you bid these cards?
By the way, when I made my comment about the 2♠ jump shift rebid being forcing, I meant GAME forcing.
Also, the suggested example of a hand where one might jump shift into a 3 card major suit is not the strong hand opposite the problem hand in this thread.
AKQ xx AKQJxx xx?
How would you bid these cards?
By the way, when I made my comment about the 2♠ jump shift rebid being forcing, I meant GAME forcing.
Also, the suggested example of a hand where one might jump shift into a 3 card major suit is not the strong hand opposite the problem hand in this thread.
#18 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2008-June-09, 15:19
ArtK78, on Jun 9 2008, 04:06 PM, said:
I realize that a jump shift on a 3 card major would be exceedingly rare, but how about this hand:
AKQ xx AKQJxx xx?
How would you bid these cards?
By the way, when I made my comment about the 2♠ jump shift rebid being forcing, I meant GAME forcing.
Also, the suggested example of a hand where one might jump shift into a 3 card major suit is not the strong hand opposite the problem hand in this thread.
AKQ xx AKQJxx xx?
How would you bid these cards?
By the way, when I made my comment about the 2♠ jump shift rebid being forcing, I meant GAME forcing.
Also, the suggested example of a hand where one might jump shift into a 3 card major suit is not the strong hand opposite the problem hand in this thread.
Yes, everyone knows that 2S is a FORCING bid.
Are you aware that partner is limited by his failure to open 2C, and 2S is only forcing because logically if one guy has shown a good 18-21 and the other guy has shown 6+ you are in a GF? However, when you have bid with much less than that over partner's NON forcing opener, you can logically choose to later pass partner's LIMITED bid if it is the best shot you have to get a plus score. For every hand that partner has 3262 and the nuts, he has far more 4?5? 18-21 hands.
By the way, 2S might make opposite your example hand, and 3N has almost no legitimate play.
#19
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 13,704
- Joined: 2005-June-15
- Gender:Male
- Location:Canada
- Interests:Bridge, golf, wine (red), cooking, reading eclectically but insatiably, travelling, making bad posts.
Posted 2008-June-09, 15:28
Quote
This seems inconsistent. You're willing to pass 1D when partner might have AKQxx x AKQxxx x but you're not willing to pass 2S because he might have that hand. Aren't you risking playing partscore in both cases?
Consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds
I don't think it is inconsistent, in fact. There must be some hands that even you would pass as responder to a 1-level opening bid (otherwise I hope that you are alerting that all 1-level opening bids are forcing one round). And I suspect that you would agree that it is possible to construct hands for opener on which you can make game opposite some of these passing hands... such occurences will be few, and often the opps will be more or less forced to save you, since they will have some strength and shape of their own.
I would pass 1♦ because the odds of his having AKQxx x AKQxxx x or similar are low enough that I will pay to that combo in exchange for not getting way too high opposite, say, AJx Kxx AKJxxx x.. where he is bidding 3♦ over my 1♥... or AQx AJxx KQJxx x where he is splintering opposite my 1♥ and so on.
Having decided to respond, I honour the force, because, while I don't like my situation, I got myself into it by responding and it would be inconsistent to pass.
If my hand was worth a response, partner has said his hand is worth a game... it is passing the js that is inconsistent. I confess I added to the confusion by coming up with an example where pass of 2♠ was wrong, but I didn't really mean to say that I was bidding because of that hand-type.. I was bidding to honour the partnership agreement.
'one of the great markers of the advance of human kindness is the howls you will hear from the Men of God' Johann Hari
#20
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 875
- Joined: 2006-June-08
Posted 2008-June-09, 15:34
I think it is fairly simple.
If you can respond to an NF opening on near zero to improve the contract, then you can pass the rebid.
Otherwise you pass the opener and hope oppos rescue you (as they do more often these days).
If you can respond to an NF opening on near zero to improve the contract, then you can pass the rebid.
Otherwise you pass the opener and hope oppos rescue you (as they do more often these days).
1♦ - 1♥
2♠ - ?