Still against Robson/Forrester
Page 1 of 1
Hammer time #3 Hands from Spain vs England
#3
Posted 2016-June-28, 08:51
I'd x too. No doubt partner is 3334.
Hi y'all!
Winner - BBO Challenge bracket #6 - February, 2017.
Winner - BBO Challenge bracket #6 - February, 2017.
#5
Posted 2016-June-28, 16:41
x for sure
"definitely that's what I like to play when I'm playing standard - I want to be able to bid diamonds because bidding good suits is important in bridge" - Meckstroth's opinion on weak 2 diamond
#6
Posted 2016-June-28, 19:38
I may be a wimp but I'm passing.
It's close but AK in clubs and Q 4th in both majors doesn't seem enough to want to re-enter the auction with a 15 count. I assume your NT is 15-17 (or 18) and so I'm a minimum, soft values in our likely trump suit. Yes the shape is right for a double but I've had these hands end up in 3Maj X -1 or 2 and IMP's lost many more times than I've had it go X all pass and Imps for us, or any of the other positive things that could occur.
Edit I should also note that I usually put emphasis on the short suit straining to re-open and I do only have 2 diamonds which is what makes this close to a bid and I would not be unhappy with a partner who chose X.
It's close but AK in clubs and Q 4th in both majors doesn't seem enough to want to re-enter the auction with a 15 count. I assume your NT is 15-17 (or 18) and so I'm a minimum, soft values in our likely trump suit. Yes the shape is right for a double but I've had these hands end up in 3Maj X -1 or 2 and IMP's lost many more times than I've had it go X all pass and Imps for us, or any of the other positive things that could occur.
Edit I should also note that I usually put emphasis on the short suit straining to re-open and I do only have 2 diamonds which is what makes this close to a bid and I would not be unhappy with a partner who chose X.
#7
Posted 2016-June-29, 02:33
#9
Posted 2016-June-30, 00:55
I'm really surprised the consensus is to double. Competing for the partscore at the 3 level, vulnerable with a minimum hand and diamond wastage on what could easily be misfit deal seems crazy.
If you changed the hand to: AQxx Kxxx xx AKx then double would be clear because the major upside (partner passing for penalties) is a legitimate possibility. On the actual hand it is very unlikely.
If you changed the hand to: AQxx Kxxx xx AKx then double would be clear because the major upside (partner passing for penalties) is a legitimate possibility. On the actual hand it is very unlikely.
#11
Posted 2016-July-01, 16:39
Fluffy, do you think it's right to double in this spot? I wish the eurobridge site showed the auctions; I see some 3♦-x contracts but I don't know if they had the same auction.
#12
Posted 2016-July-02, 01:25
You can look for the 6 vugraph tables of the round on the BBO archives. I think double is easy with ♦xx, and it is obvious not to double with ♦Qx. ♦Ax is somewhere in the middle and who knows...
One thing is to think double is best in a public forum, and another is to make it against Robson/Forrester at the table
One thing is to think double is best in a public forum, and another is to make it against Robson/Forrester at the table
Page 1 of 1
Still against Robson/Forrester