[billw55]

Fluffy, on 2015-February-05, 07:32, said:

---

If someone bid 6♠ I would ask what to do over RHO's 7♣, but nobody did, same as me who passed hoping partner had something god in clubs. Sadly even 7♠ -800 is better than 6♣.

I lost 8 for -1390, 500 in 6♠ would pick a lot I guess, and 7♠ would also win 5 or 6.

East will really bid 7♣ with that suit ? Bold. I would just double 6♠. It's not like west promised anything, he was forced to bid and for all we know, north might have bid 4♠ to make.

[Fluffy]

I can tell you that he tanked before passing 6♣, at first I Wasn't sure if he tanked because he wanted to bid 7♣ or because he had some 0553 where he was contemplating 6♦. But seeing the full hand it is obvious what he was thinking about. Also remember West can make a forcing pass over 6♠.

[billw55]

Fluffy, on 2015-February-05, 10:32, said:

I can tell you that he tanked before passing 6♣, at first I Wasn't sure if he tanked because he wanted to bid 7♣ or because he had some 0553 where he was contemplating 6♦. But seeing the full hand it is obvious what he was thinking about. Also remember West can make a forcing pass over 6♠.

Yeah the tank could have been either way.

As for the forcing pass, how is this normally done in a situation where west could have anywhere from nothing up to quite a bit? Would double show weakness?

[Fluffy]

Yes in theory double is weakest, and West has nothing close to that, remember partner has made a slam forcing bid on first round!. But being in an individual some disagreements might arise, even if they are experts they don't know partner is expert as well

[masonbarge]

Fluffy, on 2015-February-02, 05:27, said:

---

Bridge for money (€0.75/IMP) I got this one wrong yesterday and was costly.

Do a lot of people play opening 2's like that now? Basically a baby 3?

What do you do with ♠KQ10xxx ♥xx ♦Kxx ♣xx?
♠KQ10xxx ♥x ♦Kxx ♣xxx?

[akwoo]

masonbarge, on 2015-February-07, 17:25, said:

Do a lot of people play opening 2's like that now? Basically a baby 3?

What do you do with ♠KQ10xxx ♥xx ♦Kxx ♣xx?
♠KQ10xxx ♥x ♦Kxx ♣xxx?

With an understanding partner, I definitely play weak 2's like that, and I open 2♠ on all of these hands.

Does that make things hard on partner (particularly if opps jump in)? Yes.

It also makes things hard on opponents, and I think they're more likely to be worse hit.

Remember - half the time, the hand belongs to the opponents, and in those cases, the purpose of bidding is to make things hard for the opponents.

Now, if you're significantly better than your opponents, you have more to lose, so then maybe you should be more constructive in your agreements.

It helps to be playing Ogust with such wide-ranging weak 2's.

[mycroft]

I will play whatever style of weak 2s my partner expects. My current partnership is *very* wide-ranging (when we're bored of our real system, we play EHAA; so, actually, we play "conservative" weak 2s usually :-). Yes, I have raised partner to game on a good hand and lost three trump tricks and a trick. We've also preempted the opponents *a lot*; and won the partscore battle in 3M (losing two trump tricks, sure) where most tables aren't finding the suit fit because they didn't open.

"Remember - half the time the hand belongs to the opponents" - and that's more than half the time when you have a bad hand in first seat. And it's actually a lot of fun when the opponents take the "marked" finesse only to find...

I do believe that *outside* strength, especially outside defensive strength, should be controlled. When it goes 2♠-p/x-3♠-4♥, I want partner to be comfortable with her (lack of) doubles and/or sacrifice decisions.