t********e
发帖数: 90 | 1 Bidding Problem 080810
Pd open 1nt (15-17), rho overcall 2s you hold
Axx
AKxxxx
x
Qxx
what's your bidding without convention in place ? | a***n
发帖数: 287 | 2 First, hi, long time no see. :) How are you?
Second, apparently the concern here is if your side has slam in hearts (or
clubs if partner has decent 5+ card cluub suit. If no convention agreed
with partner, I'd bid 3S here just to see how partner can further describe
his hand.
On the other hand, to be frank with you, I don't know what kind of response
from partner surely shows a bright picture for a slam. I do know certain
response shows a slam is almost hopeless though.
【在 t********e 的大作中提到】
: Bidding Problem 080810
: Pd open 1nt (15-17), rho overcall 2s you hold
: Axx
: AKxxxx
: x
: Qxx
: what's your bidding without convention in place ?
| c****u
发帖数: 3277 | 3 no convention? lol, 5H then. With convention I'd transfer to H then cuebid.
【在 t********e 的大作中提到】
: Bidding Problem 080810
: Pd open 1nt (15-17), rho overcall 2s you hold
: Axx
: AKxxxx
: x
: Qxx
: what's your bidding without convention in place ?
| h***o
发帖数: 2321 | 4 3s
【在 t********e 的大作中提到】
: Bidding Problem 080810
: Pd open 1nt (15-17), rho overcall 2s you hold
: Axx
: AKxxxx
: x
: Qxx
: what's your bidding without convention in place ?
| m****r
发帖数: 6639 | 5 我也倾向3s, 反正要叫一个搭档绝对不会pass掉的.
【在 h***o 的大作中提到】
: 3s
| d****i
发帖数: 90 | 6
even that might have different treatments, such as "go 6 with a spade
control"(then it would be hard for partner to imagine such a spade holding), and so forth.
imho in most cases "no convention/no agreement" leave very little to discuss at all.
【在 c****u 的大作中提到】
: no convention? lol, 5H then. With convention I'd transfer to H then cuebid.
| c****u
发帖数: 3277 | 7 lol, 5H merely says I have a good hand, if you like your hand, you can bid 6.
Those control asking bids are one of the biggest nonsense of modern bridge
and
they indeed are one of the most frequently abused bids.
cuebid.
【在 d****i 的大作中提到】
:
: even that might have different treatments, such as "go 6 with a spade
: control"(then it would be hard for partner to imagine such a spade holding), and so forth.
: imho in most cases "no convention/no agreement" leave very little to discuss at all.
| d****i
发帖数: 90 | 8
6.
i am more curious in hearing of the rest of the biggest nonsenses.
this particular one looks better than "do something smart", "do you feel
lucky enough" kind of "agreements", doesn't it?
【在 c****u 的大作中提到】
: lol, 5H merely says I have a good hand, if you like your hand, you can bid 6.
: Those control asking bids are one of the biggest nonsense of modern bridge
: and
: they indeed are one of the most frequently abused bids.
:
: cuebid.
| c****u
发帖数: 3277 | 9 the basic idea is that one control in opp's suit may never be enough, if
partner has to bid 6 with control in that suit, you may indeed end up at
a lot of unmakable slams, that's where the nonsense comes from. Also,
with some simple transfers or forcing bids, the jump to 5 level to ask
control becomes even more ridiculous, "if you can find out the control
problem at 4 level, why do you want to jump to 5?"
Actually a direct jump to 5 level should rarely be control asking. It should
just show no
【在 d****i 的大作中提到】
:
: 6.
: i am more curious in hearing of the rest of the biggest nonsenses.
: this particular one looks better than "do something smart", "do you feel
: lucky enough" kind of "agreements", doesn't it?
| d****i
发帖数: 90 | 10
if you can't afford 6 when partner does have spade control, it is the
decision
to use this agreement that makes no sense, not necessarily the agreement
itself.
good point. again, if spade controls can be confirmed (with or without) at
level of 4, it makes the use of jump to 5 at least nonsense.
should
trumps,
yes to "no cuebids", a must to "good trumps", true with "4N doesn't do"; but
think it from partner's side, 1. does he need to worry about spade control
at all for 6 (you denied it, i assum
【在 c****u 的大作中提到】
: the basic idea is that one control in opp's suit may never be enough, if
: partner has to bid 6 with control in that suit, you may indeed end up at
: a lot of unmakable slams, that's where the nonsense comes from. Also,
: with some simple transfers or forcing bids, the jump to 5 level to ask
: control becomes even more ridiculous, "if you can find out the control
: problem at 4 level, why do you want to jump to 5?"
: Actually a direct jump to 5 level should rarely be control asking. It should
: just show no
| | | c****u
发帖数: 3277 | 11 Well, now give me a hand where you think partner can bid 6 with a spade
control
and stop without spade control and whenever partner bids, it's a reasonable
contract. I'd tell you, they are extremely rare, because the slam usually
not only a matter of whether partner holds spade control or not, it's often
a matter of overall strength. For example, you may think
xx KQJTxxx KQJTx can be a good hand for that purpose, but can partner
bid 6H with AJx xxx xxx AKQJ?if you bid it, you are going down even
【在 d****i 的大作中提到】
:
: if you can't afford 6 when partner does have spade control, it is the
: decision
: to use this agreement that makes no sense, not necessarily the agreement
: itself.
: good point. again, if spade controls can be confirmed (with or without) at
: level of 4, it makes the use of jump to 5 at least nonsense.
: should
: trumps,
: yes to "no cuebids", a must to "good trumps", true with "4N doesn't do"; but
| b***y
发帖数: 2804 | 12 What's wrong with straightforward 3H? Without convention (which means
everything is Standard), 3H is forcing. If partner bids 3NT, you can cuebid
4S to implicitly set hearts as trump (which shows 6+ hearts); if partner
raises to 4H, you can rkc; if partner bids 4m, you will have headache, but
no more than starting with ambiguous 3S.
I think in general, willy-nilly "we don't know what it means" cuebid is a
bad habit in bridge. | c****u
发帖数: 3277 | 13 well, 3H by default is probably nonforcing.
cuebid
【在 b***y 的大作中提到】
: What's wrong with straightforward 3H? Without convention (which means
: everything is Standard), 3H is forcing. If partner bids 3NT, you can cuebid
: 4S to implicitly set hearts as trump (which shows 6+ hearts); if partner
: raises to 4H, you can rkc; if partner bids 4m, you will have headache, but
: no more than starting with ambiguous 3S.
: I think in general, willy-nilly "we don't know what it means" cuebid is a
: bad habit in bridge.
| b***y
发帖数: 2804 | 14 I thought 3H had always been forcing, the Lebensohl convention was created
so that non-forcing 3H contract can be reached...
【在 c****u 的大作中提到】
: well, 3H by default is probably nonforcing.
:
: cuebid
| c****u
发帖数: 3277 | 15 there is no leb in standard treatment. leb is also not a part of sayc.
【在 b***y 的大作中提到】
: I thought 3H had always been forcing, the Lebensohl convention was created
: so that non-forcing 3H contract can be reached...
| b***y
发帖数: 2804 | 16 That is what I meant. Standard bidding treats 3H as forcing, so Lebensohl (
as a convention, not standard treatment) was invented to take care of the
need for non-forcing bids. It was introduced to solve a problem in standard
bidding (which is, no non-forcing new-suit bids available after opponents
intervene). | d****i
发帖数: 90 | 17
cuebid
can't agree more.
there are 3H=GI agreements though, but i would also guess that GF is more "
standard" (popular).
【在 b***y 的大作中提到】
: What's wrong with straightforward 3H? Without convention (which means
: everything is Standard), 3H is forcing. If partner bids 3NT, you can cuebid
: 4S to implicitly set hearts as trump (which shows 6+ hearts); if partner
: raises to 4H, you can rkc; if partner bids 4m, you will have headache, but
: no more than starting with ambiguous 3S.
: I think in general, willy-nilly "we don't know what it means" cuebid is a
: bad habit in bridge.
| w****b
发帖数: 623 | 18 I think control asking is sometimes still useful. It is probably true you
can have alternative routes to get to slam (or avoid slam) but this
sometimes simplify things quite a bid.
For instance if you have a hand like xx AKQxxxx Ax Ax, being able to bid 5H
somehow to ask S control will simplify a lot of things. If you try to cuebid
after transfer, pd sometimes may not be able to evaluate his hand to decide
whether to cooperate or not.
In addition, it seems to me that here you can have two ways t | c****u
发帖数: 3277 | 19 lol, xx AKQxxxx Ax Ax is a rkc hand after partner's 1NT opening.
You can shoot him if he produces a dummy with QJxx Jxx KQJ KQJ, or shoot
yourself, lol. Actually this hand may not justify a strong 1NT opening
because of the dubious values in H/D/C and extremely lack of controls.
Basically, a direct jump to 5H as control asking in one suit
is extremely rare and most frequently abused IMO.
5H
cuebid
decide
to
Kx
sometimes you belong to 6NT in this case), and
【在 w****b 的大作中提到】
: I think control asking is sometimes still useful. It is probably true you
: can have alternative routes to get to slam (or avoid slam) but this
: sometimes simplify things quite a bid.
: For instance if you have a hand like xx AKQxxxx Ax Ax, being able to bid 5H
: somehow to ask S control will simplify a lot of things. If you try to cuebid
: after transfer, pd sometimes may not be able to evaluate his hand to decide
: whether to cooperate or not.
: In addition, it seems to me that here you can have two ways t
| c****u
发帖数: 3277 | 20 Also, another problem is that you may miss 7 if you only need spade controls.
For example, if you bid 5H with xx AKxxxxxx KQJ -, if partner holds both S
controls and DA or SADACA, you miss 7 and your 5H only asks for 6. That's
why
you almost never see me jump to 5 level to ask for certain controls in our
partnership. When I jump, I basically say: I have no cuebids available
and I still want to bid...
you
sense
have
sense
【在 c****u 的大作中提到】
: lol, xx AKQxxxx Ax Ax is a rkc hand after partner's 1NT opening.
: You can shoot him if he produces a dummy with QJxx Jxx KQJ KQJ, or shoot
: yourself, lol. Actually this hand may not justify a strong 1NT opening
: because of the dubious values in H/D/C and extremely lack of controls.
: Basically, a direct jump to 5H as control asking in one suit
: is extremely rare and most frequently abused IMO.
:
: 5H
: cuebid
: decide
| w****b
发帖数: 623 | 21 Well I'm someone who often upgrades but seldomly downgrades. So QJx Jx KQJx
KQJx looks to me a perfectly ok 1NT, especially 14-16.
【在 c****u 的大作中提到】
: lol, xx AKQxxxx Ax Ax is a rkc hand after partner's 1NT opening.
: You can shoot him if he produces a dummy with QJxx Jxx KQJ KQJ, or shoot
: yourself, lol. Actually this hand may not justify a strong 1NT opening
: because of the dubious values in H/D/C and extremely lack of controls.
: Basically, a direct jump to 5H as control asking in one suit
: is extremely rare and most frequently abused IMO.
:
: 5H
: cuebid
: decide
| c****u
发帖数: 3277 | 22 lol, 14-16 is another story. Also, QJx Jx KQJx KQJx is slightly better,
but not a lot better than the hand I showed. QJx is still not easy to
evaluate,
after that 2S bid, you know your hand sucks big time if you want to play
slams. Again, such kind of hands are extremely rare and we still have
enough room to pass that message to partner at low level that this hand
sucks if partner doesn't jump to 5 level and starts from transfers.
Also, that's why I tend not to
often use HCP to evaluate hands an
【在 w****b 的大作中提到】
: Well I'm someone who often upgrades but seldomly downgrades. So QJx Jx KQJx
: KQJx looks to me a perfectly ok 1NT, especially 14-16.
|
|
