B 3♦
If partner has 7 clubs ♣ AJ9xxxx must have good high cards outside and yet did not rebid 2NT or 3NT. I reckon he could well have 8 of them. I think that with 7 or 8 tricks in clubs we could well have 3NT on. And as DickHy observed right siding for 3NT could be crucial. So, I will go for 3♦. I will pass 3N or 4♣.
Problem A
A word about the BWS meaning of 2♣ and 2♠. If 2♠ is a cue, then what do you bid with 4+♠? Presumably a double is for penalties and not a type of responsive double. I note Blu’s says that in his view 2♠ should be natural is not a cue.
Problem A
A word about the BWS meaning of 2♣ and 2♠. If 2♠ is a cue, then what do you bid with 4+♠? Presumably a double is for penalties and not a type of responsive double. I note Blu’s says that in his view 2♠ should be natural is not a cue.
(1 !C) - X - (1 !S) - X
I like to play this as responsive. I know Larry Cohen does too, employing the "no penalty doubles at the one or two level theory." But he recommends a partnership discuss this as it is not universal. But I checked BWS. It is indeed played as penalty!
(1 !C) - P - (1 !S) - 2 !S
I think we all play this as natural. Something along the lines of a good six-card suit.
(1 !C) - X - (1 !S) - 2 !S
2 !S natural? I suppose because it is rare, and the specialized meaning of the cuebid as a "suit-agreement or game" bid had more use. The double opened up that possibility for us.
Still thinking about Problem A (which has many viable choices) and H (I hate lead problems). The rest I have settled on.
(1 !C) - P - (1 !S) - 2 !S
I think we all play this as natural. Something along the lines of a good six-card suit.
(1 !C) - P - (1 !S) - 2 !S
I think we all play this as natural. Something along the lines of a good six-card suit.
No we don't. I play that as showing 6 !H + 4 !D. (2 !C would show 6 !D +4 !H) It is true, that here it would have been better the other way round. However, HR= HR6; LR = LR6 is easy to remember.
Remember the Beatles song "When I'm 64" So call it the McCartney convention.
....And quoting some wisdom from Kenberg on this point:
(1 !C ) - X - (1 !S ) - 2 !S
2 !S natural? I suppose because it is rare, and the specialized meaning of the cuebid as a "suit-agreement or game" bid had more use. The double opened up that possibility for us.
B 3♦
If partner has 7 clubs ♣ AJ9xxxx must have good high cards outside and yet did not rebid 2NT or 3NT. I reckon he could well have 8 of them. I think that with 7 or 8 tricks in clubs we could well have 3NT on. And as DickHy observed right siding for 3NT could be crucial. So, I will go for 3♦. I will pass 3N or 4♣.
There it is!
That's what I've been thinking. 3 !D . . . Wondering if I was the only one. But . . . does this imply my !C holding?
I keep intending to post but am constantly pulled away. Too many irons in the fire right now.
Problem H: This hand seems to call for a trump to defend against a cross ruff. But too risky. C K
NAME | BW-SCORE | RANK | MPs |
CCR3 | 780 | 1 | 30 |
BabsG | 750 | 2 | 25 |
BluBayou | 740 | 3 | 20 |
VeeRee | 730 | 4 | 11 |
. . . . . . . . | . . . . . . . . . . . . | . . . . . . . | . . . . |