[xcurt]

Ok, so I touched actual cards for the first time in a looong time since I might play the DC NABC in a few weeks. Partner is not strong, and the field ranges from pretty good to totally random. Scoring is matchpoints. Here are a few decisions.

1: both vul, 2nd seat, you are playing one of the very good pairs: AQJ4, A876, AJ, K84. (2H)-?

2: AKJ5, A, T2, KJT862, the opponents don't bid: 1C-1S; 2S-?

[ONEferBRID]

1) Choice between DBL and 2NT. With either one partner can check for 4 cards Sp. I think I'd DBL.

2) Now this is something I have not seen before.
I know what I CAN'T rebid and that is 4C-jump.... because that would be a splinter ( Cl-shortness )....

I think I'd bid 3H, ostensibly a help-suit gametry/or cuebid.

[jdonn]

1. Double. This really isn't a problem, why bid 2NT when you are a little above the range and have four good spades?

This hand is a good plug for something I like that no one else seems to, where leb is only bid on weak hands and has no strong hand options. That would make double more comfortable since I could pass a 2NT response (maybe even rightsiding in the process).

2. I would bid 3♣ if you didn't say partner was weak since that should be forcing undiscussed. Since I'm not going to risk that here, I'll try 3♦, blackwood if he forces to game, and signing off in game over 3♥ or 3♠.

[Phil]

1. I like 2N at MPs. I'm slightly heavy, but my heart spot might be something important and I do not relish putting this dummy down in 3♦.

2. Agree with 3♣, hopefully our not-so-strong partner won't pass it.

[ONEferBRID]

2) I was worried about a pass of 3C too , but it should be forcing to 3S.
3C has merit and should be treated ostensibly as a gametry.
It could help distinguish it from a 3 card ( x x x ) opening or a real suit.

If it is a real suit, and you find out your side is slammish with partner
having a Diam Control, then 6NT may be safer than 6S for fear of an opening
lead Cl ruff.

[aguahombre]

jdonn, on Jul 3 2009, 03:35 PM, said:

This hand is a good plug for something I like that no one else seems to, where leb is only bid on weak hands and has no strong hand options. That would make double more comfortable since I could pass a 2NT response (maybe even rightsiding in the process).

ok, so (1) why not leben with only weak hands after 2H dbl? and (2) if leben could still have 7 or 8, isn't passing a bit dangerous? This is not an argument...pls educate me.

[MFA]

1) 2NT. In terms of playing strength, I'm not out of range. Dbl seems to beg for an advance into a minor. I can't pass a lebensohl 2NT, if I would have wanted, since there are strong variants. Isn't that the case for almost everybody?

2) Abstain. Perhaps 4♦ splinter, then 6♣. Or something. Guessing here with no system and a not-so-strong partner is not so interesting. I'm surely not bidding 3♣ if there is any chance, he might pass (which I strongly suspect there is).

[Fluffy]

at first sight I liked downgrading those 19 HCP because I lacked positional heart strenght I normally have for 2NT. But passing lebenshol sounds sexy.


splinter 4♥ on the other, I won't like it if partner has ♥K+♦A but nobody is perfect

[xcurt]

On the first my plan was to pass 2NT lebensohl, but the auction didn't go that way. My seeded opponent called that "an interesting plan," so I'm happy to see that some folks think it's reasonable. Matchpoints offers such a premium for playing in the correct strain, I can handle 3m easily by bidding 3NT, and the opponents seem unlikely to bounce hearts, so I thought it was pretty clear to double. All actions are flawed and doubling seems to offer the smallest window for disaster -- whatever your strong meaning that runs through 2NT. We have a good hand with good spades, and typically one of the spade forces is the hand that bids 2NT first, so partner holding the disaster hand seems less likely in light of what we know at this point.

On the second, I think there isn't really any good way to find out what we need even if we are playing some kind of sophisticated game tries. I posted this one because some pretty good pairs also missed this slam our way. My inclination was to bash 6♣ but I was afraid if that turned out to have no play partner might give up on the session as this was our third board. Partner had the perfecto minimum (xxxx, Kxx, Axx, AQx) and the ♠Q was doubleton onside, so everyone made 13 tricks. I can't see any game try that will get you what you really need -- diamonds controlled, plus enough of the other relevant features: ♠Q, ♣A, (4+ clubs or ♣Q), (♦A+♥K).