Who bid too little?
#2
Posted 2014-January-20, 16:26
at unfav at this scoring, north's conservatism with regard to jumping to 4s is entirely fair.
#3
Posted 2014-January-20, 16:34
#4
Posted 2014-January-20, 16:40
Cyberyeti, on 2014-January-20, 16:34, said:
Or a diamond lead or a trump lead. I can't vote unless you include defense at the other table which may have been just an unlucky club lead or a hail Mary heart finesse.
What is baby oil made of?
#5
Posted 2014-January-20, 17:02
ggwhiz, on 2014-January-20, 16:40, said:
I don't really understand why "who bid too little" would be affected by the other table. If you think it's a bad game to be in, isn't the answer "Neither"?
The heart hook was on for a diamond pitch. At my table they started with three rounds of clubs, so you could actually make 5 if you risked the hook later.
#6
Posted 2014-January-20, 18:07
Having said that, South really should bid game.
#7
Posted 2014-January-20, 18:21
jeffford76, on 2014-January-20, 17:02, said:
The heart hook was on for a diamond pitch. At my table they started with three rounds of clubs, so you could actually make 5 if you risked the hook later.
It's not obvious what to do on the third club, as you should potentially be getting overruffed
#8
Posted 2014-January-20, 20:15
of course south could have bid 1NT earlier,...
-P.J. Painter.
#10
Posted 2014-January-21, 03:38
I mean North marches to the 3 level, red vs. green without any
knowledge, that his partner has anything at all, he even bids
3S, not 2S, and we are discussing, who did bid too little?
And that game is not brilliant on the given set, is not really
relevant, change the North hand slightly, e.g. give it a 2nd
heart, and you want to be there, and the 7222 shape makes the
North hand a bit worser than the 7321 hand North actually has.
With kind regards
Marlowe
Uwe Gebhardt (P_Marlowe)
#11
Posted 2014-January-21, 03:46
Bbradley62, on 2014-January-20, 22:22, said:
So you pitch a diamond and take the heart finesse when it's ruffed, if it's not going to be ruffed then the man with the clubs should have put a diamond on the table at trick 2, and probably shouldn't have bid 2♣.
#12
Posted 2014-January-21, 07:33
I don't like North jumping to 4S at all in BAM or matchpoints. You have the spade suit and 15hcp - it could easily be a partscore hand. Why voluntarily go minus?
ps: I love Ken's 3C call.
Sometimes I use big words I don't fully understand to make myself seem more photosynthesis.
#13
Posted 2014-January-21, 10:16
And look at the game itself -- on a major suit lead it's a mediocre contract at best (lack of entries for a double diamond finesse) and even on a club lead, it might very well go down (either a 3rd round club ruff or a lack of entries for the double diamond finesse).
And by the way, the double diamond finesse CAN fail here.
I don't like 4♠ at all. In fact, I admire the restraint by both players. Change the Q♣ to the Q♠ and South should go 4♠.
#14
Posted 2014-January-22, 05:28
4♠ is neither a great nor an awful contract, ♥ K is more likely to be with E when he showed 4-5 hearts. Yes W opened but E made a neg double. So E has some values too.
On a side note, if E does not have ♥ K, it is not a clear lead to lead from xxxx or Jxxx. Why would he ? All other leads increases the chance of 4♠.(not too much but still)
4♠ is obviously far from being a great contract also, for the reasons others mentioned.
All those who thinks that it was north in fault for the failure of playing 4♠, should ask themselves why 4♠ is not such a great contract even after pd provides an A Q in a suit, behind the owner of this suit + 2 card spades + another Q which may actually be 10th trick if defenders make a mistake.
"It's only when a mosquito lands on your testicles that you realize there is always a way to solve problems without using violence!"
"Well to be perfectly honest, in my humble opinion, of course without offending anyone who thinks differently from my point of view, but also by looking into this matter in a different perspective and without being condemning of one's view's and by trying to make it objectified, and by considering each and every one's valid opinion, I honestly believe that I completely forgot what I was going to say."
#15
Posted 2014-January-22, 06:47
HighLow21, on 2014-January-21, 10:16, said:
And look at the game itself -- on a major suit lead it's a mediocre contract at best (lack of entries for a double diamond finesse) and even on a club lead, it might very well go down (either a 3rd round club ruff or a lack of entries for the double diamond finesse).
And by the way, the double diamond finesse CAN fail here.
I don't like 4♠ at all. In fact, I admire the restraint by both players. Change the Q♣ to the Q♠ and South should go 4♠.
4♠ is a sub par contract, 3N requires spades not 4-0. I would rather be in 3♠ than 4♠, but 3N is the spot.
Both players could have taken other decisions, I like 3♣ by N and might try 3N over 3♠ by S, but both players decided to be a little conservative on the same board.
#16
Posted 2014-January-22, 12:05
Cyberyeti, on 2014-January-22, 06:47, said:
Both players could have taken other decisions, I like 3♣ by N and might try 3N over 3♠ by S, but both players decided to be a little conservative on the same board.
Excellent point Cyberyeti -- and that happens. Sometimes, both players decide to be a little too aggressive; sometimes, it balances out. If only bridge had half-bids available! ;-)
#17
Posted 2014-January-22, 12:35
greatly increase the chances of minimal to no spade losers I am bidding 4s.
I do not care one whit about club Q and if you changed it to dia Q I would merely consider it a plus.
this is more of a partnership trust issue than anything else if p does not think they have 8 tricks
they should not bid 3s since they can expect 2 tricks at most from me with this bidding. In my mind
it is that simple.
4s may end up being a poor contract but i have seen far worse and partnership harmony is more important
than a successful whim that works once in a while because p will tend to become either more aggressive or
more conservative depending on your whims:))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
#18
Posted 2014-January-22, 13:11
gszes, on 2014-January-22, 12:35, said:
greatly increase the chances of minimal to no spade losers I am bidding 4s.
I do not care one whit about club Q and if you changed it to dia Q I would merely consider it a plus.
this is more of a partnership trust issue than anything else if p does not think they have 8 tricks
they should not bid 3s since they can expect 2 tricks at most from me with this bidding. In my mind
it is that simple.
4s may end up being a poor contract but i have seen far worse and partnership harmony is more important
than a successful whim that works once in a while because p will tend to become either more aggressive or
more conservative depending on your whims:))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Some people won't have 8 tricks ever as they'd have started with a double. Opps appear to have something like 12 opposite 6 so K♥ is 2:1 to be offside modified slightly by the other hand being longer in hearts, so I don't see where you get 2 likely tricks from, 1.5 at most.
#19
Posted 2014-January-22, 13:15
While I sympathize with Ken Rexford's idea of 3♣ asking for a club control for NT, I personally have the agreement that when they have two bid suits and I could cue either one, I cue what I have, not what I need, which would be unavailable here; I would also bid 3♠, and hope that partner realized that they needed stops in both to try 3N - which would be a great bid in context.
#20
Posted 2014-January-22, 14:21