b***y
发帖数: 2804 | 1 北美桥牌大赛本周进入白热化。考虑到一些牌友仍在费城战斗，这次的题目以娱乐为主
，主要议题是首攻。
时间回到30多年前的奥林匹克桥牌赛。IMP双有，你坐东家拿到下面一副充满刺激的牌：
AKJ876 / AT7632 / -- / 2
同伴发牌，叫牌过程：
W N E S
P 1D 2D 2H
4S 4NT 5S 6C
P 6D 6S 7D
P P X AP
2D = 双高花
2H = 方块加叫，limit raise or better
4NT = 黑木问叫
6C = 梅花长套，给同伴满贯花色的选择
问题来了：你首攻什么？ | i****e
发帖数: 642 | 2 Didn't you say it 娱乐为主?
I lead a trump :)
牌：
【在 b***y 的大作中提到】
: 北美桥牌大赛本周进入白热化。考虑到一些牌友仍在费城战斗，这次的题目以娱乐为主
: ，主要议题是首攻。
: 时间回到30多年前的奥林匹克桥牌赛。IMP双有，你坐东家拿到下面一副充满刺激的牌：
: AKJ876 / AT7632 / -- / 2
: 同伴发牌，叫牌过程：
: W N E S
: P 1D 2D 2H
: 4S 4NT 5S 6C
: P 6D 6S 7D
: P P X AP
| i****e
发帖数: 642 | 3 This looks like a psychological guess. When LHO chooses to cue a major, he
should cue one with control (may be 2nd round control). But I saw some top
players cue the one without control, and I have no idea why they do it that
way.
RHO's 4NT may suggest control in spade, but maybe he has 3 or 4 spades, so
he can deduce his pd holds singleton or void spade.
So there is no clear answer based on above nonsense analysis.
The most reliable player on the table is your pd, so we should always trust
him other than any opponents. Pd has longer spades than hearts, so one of
the opps is likely to hold spade void than heart void. So I lead HA! Am I
lucky?
牌：
【在 b***y 的大作中提到】
: 北美桥牌大赛本周进入白热化。考虑到一些牌友仍在费城战斗，这次的题目以娱乐为主
: ，主要议题是首攻。
: 时间回到30多年前的奥林匹克桥牌赛。IMP双有，你坐东家拿到下面一副充满刺激的牌：
: AKJ876 / AT7632 / -- / 2
: 同伴发牌，叫牌过程：
: W N E S
: P 1D 2D 2H
: 4S 4NT 5S 6C
: P 6D 6S 7D
: P P X AP
| m****r
发帖数: 6639 | 4 i was thinking along the same line of reasoning.
that
trust
【在 i****e 的大作中提到】
: This looks like a psychological guess. When LHO chooses to cue a major, he
: should cue one with control (may be 2nd round control). But I saw some top
: players cue the one without control, and I have no idea why they do it that
: way.
: RHO's 4NT may suggest control in spade, but maybe he has 3 or 4 spades, so
: he can deduce his pd holds singleton or void spade.
: So there is no clear answer based on above nonsense analysis.
: The most reliable player on the table is your pd, so we should always trust
: him other than any opponents. Pd has longer spades than hearts, so one of
: the opps is likely to hold spade void than heart void. So I lead HA! Am I
| b***y
发帖数: 2804 | 5 I can tell you three things:
1) Luck is a big factor in bridge.
2) Your side does have more spades than hearts.
3) You made the same choice as Bob Hamman.
【在 i****e 的大作中提到】
: This looks like a psychological guess. When LHO chooses to cue a major, he
: should cue one with control (may be 2nd round control). But I saw some top
: players cue the one without control, and I have no idea why they do it that
: way.
: RHO's 4NT may suggest control in spade, but maybe he has 3 or 4 spades, so
: he can deduce his pd holds singleton or void spade.
: So there is no clear answer based on above nonsense analysis.
: The most reliable player on the table is your pd, so we should always trust
: him other than any opponents. Pd has longer spades than hearts, so one of
: the opps is likely to hold spade void than heart void. So I lead HA! Am I
| b***y
发帖数: 2804 | 6 Then the last thing: opponents made the grand.
庄家两手牌：
North：T / KQ9 / AT9832 / K98
South：4 / -- / KJ75 / AQJT6543
坐东首攻的是Hamman，南家是法国的Chemla，这副牌决定了当年世界冠军赛的胜负。赛
后Chemla说，他当时叫了7D，知道哈曼肯定会攻错。牛啊。
【在 b***y 的大作中提到】
: I can tell you three things:
: 1) Luck is a big factor in bridge.
: 2) Your side does have more spades than hearts.
: 3) You made the same choice as Bob Hamman.
| i****e
发帖数: 642 | 7 OK, although I am wrong, at least Hamman did the same :)
But I would not double 7D, since I am not sure I can make the correct lead.
Then my score will be better than Hamman's :)
【在 b***y 的大作中提到】
: Then the last thing: opponents made the grand.
: 庄家两手牌：
: North：T / KQ9 / AT9832 / K98
: South：4 / -- / KJ75 / AQJT6543
: 坐东首攻的是Hamman，南家是法国的Chemla，这副牌决定了当年世界冠军赛的胜负。赛
: 后Chemla说，他当时叫了7D，知道哈曼肯定会攻错。牛啊。
| b***y
发帖数: 2804 | 8 Hamman's score could be much worse. I think Chemla probably bid 7D as a two-
way shot: it might make (on wrong lead), or it could be cheap sacrifice
against 6S. If he was so sure that Hamman would have got it wrong, he should
have redoubled. :-)
【在 i****e 的大作中提到】
: OK, although I am wrong, at least Hamman did the same :)
: But I would not double 7D, since I am not sure I can make the correct lead.
: Then my score will be better than Hamman's :)
| m****r
发帖数: 6639 | 9 but the redouble might change the picture and make the lead right again?
two-
should
【在 b***y 的大作中提到】
: Hamman's score could be much worse. I think Chemla probably bid 7D as a two-
: way shot: it might make (on wrong lead), or it could be cheap sacrifice
: against 6S. If he was so sure that Hamman would have got it wrong, he should
: have redoubled. :-)
| b***y
发帖数: 2804 | 10 无论如何，1980年那副牌已经成为永远的经典。时间回到2012年的费城北美大赛，你的
首攻仍将决定冠军的归属。
IMP，局况有对无。你仍坐东，拿到：98 / T4 / AJ54 / AQJT3
仍然是同伴发牌，叫牌过程稍有不同：
W N E S
P 1H 2C 3C
4C 4D P 4S
X XX P 5C
P 5D P 5H
P 5NT P 7H
AP
3C = 红心加叫，limit raise or better
XX = 黑桃首轮控制
仍然轮到你首攻，你攻哪张牌？ | | | b***y
发帖数: 2804 | 11 I think after redouble, Hamman would be more sure that South has spade void.
:-)
【在 m****r 的大作中提到】
: but the redouble might change the picture and make the lead right again?
:
: two-
: should
| p***r
发帖数: 20570 | 12 I saw weishu did that once and made his grand.
牌：
【在 b***y 的大作中提到】
: 北美桥牌大赛本周进入白热化。考虑到一些牌友仍在费城战斗，这次的题目以娱乐为主
: ，主要议题是首攻。
: 时间回到30多年前的奥林匹克桥牌赛。IMP双有，你坐东家拿到下面一副充满刺激的牌：
: AKJ876 / AT7632 / -- / 2
: 同伴发牌，叫牌过程：
: W N E S
: P 1D 2D 2H
: 4S 4NT 5S 6C
: P 6D 6S 7D
: P P X AP
| i****e
发帖数: 642 | 13 I would think in the consistent way, so I lead DA. Bridge involves luck, but
probability will play a role eventually. How about my luck this time?
【在 b***y 的大作中提到】
: 无论如何，1980年那副牌已经成为永远的经典。时间回到2012年的费城北美大赛，你的
: 首攻仍将决定冠军的归属。
: IMP，局况有对无。你仍坐东，拿到：98 / T4 / AJ54 / AQJT3
: 仍然是同伴发牌，叫牌过程稍有不同：
: W N E S
: P 1H 2C 3C
: 4C 4D P 4S
: X XX P 5C
: P 5D P 5H
: P 5NT P 7H
| b***y
发帖数: 2804 | 14 Did weishu do this in 1980? :-)
【在 p***r 的大作中提到】
: I saw weishu did that once and made his grand.
:
: 牌：
| b***y
发帖数: 2804 | 15 So North cuebid 4D and 5D, you just don't believe him? :-)
【在 i****e 的大作中提到】
: I would think in the consistent way, so I lead DA. Bridge involves luck, but
: probability will play a role eventually. How about my luck this time?
| m****r
发帖数: 6639 | 16 i think i need to think outside the box. S9.
【在 b***y 的大作中提到】
: 无论如何，1980年那副牌已经成为永远的经典。时间回到2012年的费城北美大赛，你的
: 首攻仍将决定冠军的归属。
: IMP，局况有对无。你仍坐东，拿到：98 / T4 / AJ54 / AQJT3
: 仍然是同伴发牌，叫牌过程稍有不同：
: W N E S
: P 1H 2C 3C
: 4C 4D P 4S
: X XX P 5C
: P 5D P 5H
: P 5NT P 7H
| p***r
发帖数: 20570 | 17 I know this hand. I think he also knew this hand.
【在 b***y 的大作中提到】
: Did weishu do this in 1980? :-)
| b***y
发帖数: 2804 | 18 This is pretty reasonable. Partner did double 4S.
【在 m****r 的大作中提到】
: i think i need to think outside the box. S9.
| b***y
发帖数: 2804 | 19 Sure. This hand has profound effect on bridge, that is why it is classic.
【在 p***r 的大作中提到】
: I know this hand. I think he also knew this hand.
| p***r
发帖数: 20570 | 20 This bidding is strange. Suppose north's redouble shows SA, 4D and 5D shows
D void,
south has to hold a stiff spade and void C to justify his bidding. So he's
likely to hold something like: x Kxxxx KQxxxxx -. If North holds AQxxx
AQJxxx - xx, trump lead would be the only lead to defeat the contract.
【在 b***y 的大作中提到】
: 无论如何，1980年那副牌已经成为永远的经典。时间回到2012年的费城北美大赛，你的
: 首攻仍将决定冠军的归属。
: IMP，局况有对无。你仍坐东，拿到：98 / T4 / AJ54 / AQJT3
: 仍然是同伴发牌，叫牌过程稍有不同：
: W N E S
: P 1H 2C 3C
: 4C 4D P 4S
: X XX P 5C
: P 5D P 5H
: P 5NT P 7H
| | | b***y
发帖数: 2804 | 21 Good players try to accurately describe their hands early. If South holds x
/ Kxxxx / KQxxxxx / --, I would expect a bid other than 3C. He will also not
settle for 5H.
【在 p***r 的大作中提到】
: This bidding is strange. Suppose north's redouble shows SA, 4D and 5D shows
: D void,
: south has to hold a stiff spade and void C to justify his bidding. So he's
: likely to hold something like: x Kxxxx KQxxxxx -. If North holds AQxxx
: AQJxxx - xx, trump lead would be the only lead to defeat the contract.
| m****r
发帖数: 6639 | 22 i just tried to read the article on bridgewinners. it threw an error: "down
1 claimers not allow on bridgeWINNERS".
【在 b***y 的大作中提到】
: This is pretty reasonable. Partner did double 4S.
| p***r
发帖数: 20570 | 23 Here, if you don't play fit showing jumps, 3C is very acceptable.
5H is not absurd either if his partner shows a D void. His partner may still
hold something like: AQxx xxxxx - AKxx, in which case, 6H doesn't have to
be very good.
This 1-5-7-0 hand is almost the minimum requirement to bid beyond 4H. Of
course, if you don't like it, you can change HK to HQ.
Another hand is 1-5-6-1 shape, in which case, you want to cash CA. Still, 5C
should show CA or void for sound players.
x
not
【在 b***y 的大作中提到】
: Good players try to accurately describe their hands early. If South holds x
: / Kxxxx / KQxxxxx / --, I would expect a bid other than 3C. He will also not
: settle for 5H.
| b***y
发帖数: 2804 | 24 No good player will bid a non-descriptive 3C here. At least should bid 4C
splinter. So there is negative inference that South wouldn't have void in
clubs. Also, with 1570 shape, 5H is timid, to say the least. Opponents bid
and raised clubs to 4-level vulnerable, so at least percentage-wise, I won't
play for partner to have AK in clubs. In addition, holding AQxx / xxxxx / -
- / AKxx, partner should be very discouraged after 5C bid (also bad heart
suit is a concern), so he will not bid 5D.
【在 p***r 的大作中提到】
: Here, if you don't play fit showing jumps, 3C is very acceptable.
: 5H is not absurd either if his partner shows a D void. His partner may still
: hold something like: AQxx xxxxx - AKxx, in which case, 6H doesn't have to
: be very good.
: This 1-5-7-0 hand is almost the minimum requirement to bid beyond 4H. Of
: course, if you don't like it, you can change HK to HQ.
: Another hand is 1-5-6-1 shape, in which case, you want to cash CA. Still, 5C
: should show CA or void for sound players.
:
: x
| p***r
发帖数: 20570 | 25 4C is very bad here, because you really don't know what you would bid over
partner's 4H. Suppose partner holds SAxx HAxxxx Dx CKxxx, 6H would have an
excellent play.
Suppose partner holds KQJx QJxxx x KQx, 5H would be too high. Therefore, no
good players would bid 4C here.
Splinters are always limited bids, which is the first thing I want to
introduce when I teach my bridge students.
Your other statements are also very strange. Why can't partner hold CAKxx?
Your opps never said they would hold CAK, and your partner never denies CAK.
Therefore, it is just a possible hand you have to cater with. 5H is not
timid at all when you heard your partner showed void in D. You often need a
quite nice hand from partner to make a good slam here and he almost always
would bid the slam with D void, SA and knows that you hold first round
control in C, voluntarily bidding 4S with a second round control bypassed 4H
if he holds reasonable trumps. Therefore, it is really a pretty good bid.
't
-
【在 b***y 的大作中提到】
: No good player will bid a non-descriptive 3C here. At least should bid 4C
: splinter. So there is negative inference that South wouldn't have void in
: clubs. Also, with 1570 shape, 5H is timid, to say the least. Opponents bid
: and raised clubs to 4-level vulnerable, so at least percentage-wise, I won't
: play for partner to have AK in clubs. In addition, holding AQxx / xxxxx / -
: - / AKxx, partner should be very discouraged after 5C bid (also bad heart
: suit is a concern), so he will not bid 5D.
| b***y
发帖数: 2804 | 26 Actually, there are lots of unknowns. I didn't say that partner couldn't
hold CAK, I said it is more likely he has lesser value in clubs, given that
the opponents bid and raised clubs when vulnerable. Sometimes you have to
make an educated guess. When you have 1-5-7-0 shape, partner opens 1H and
later cuebid, and opponents bid some number of clubs, your hand is huge.
Give partner as little as Axxx,Axxxxx,--,xxx, slam is virtually cold, grand
slam is not hopeless. And you don't actually know that partner has diamond
void for sure, he could have singleton A. Nothing is 100% certain, but I am
not stopping short of slam after partner cuebid at 4-level then 5-level.
Partner must have compensating values, just having diamond void is not good
enough reason to keep cuebidding at 5-level.
【在 p***r 的大作中提到】
: 4C is very bad here, because you really don't know what you would bid over
: partner's 4H. Suppose partner holds SAxx HAxxxx Dx CKxxx, 6H would have an
: excellent play.
: Suppose partner holds KQJx QJxxx x KQx, 5H would be too high. Therefore, no
: good players would bid 4C here.
: Splinters are always limited bids, which is the first thing I want to
: introduce when I teach my bridge students.
: Your other statements are also very strange. Why can't partner hold CAKxx?
: Your opps never said they would hold CAK, and your partner never denies CAK.
: Therefore, it is just a possible hand you have to cater with. 5H is not
| p***r
发帖数: 20570 | 27 This is about hand evaluation. After you cuebid 4S and 5C, Axxx Axxxx - xxx
is much stronger than AQxx xxxxx - AKxx. When you have to guess and I have
an approach to stay out of slams when facing the second hand, I have an edge
.
that
grand
am
good
【在 b***y 的大作中提到】
: Actually, there are lots of unknowns. I didn't say that partner couldn't
: hold CAK, I said it is more likely he has lesser value in clubs, given that
: the opponents bid and raised clubs when vulnerable. Sometimes you have to
: make an educated guess. When you have 1-5-7-0 shape, partner opens 1H and
: later cuebid, and opponents bid some number of clubs, your hand is huge.
: Give partner as little as Axxx,Axxxxx,--,xxx, slam is virtually cold, grand
: slam is not hopeless. And you don't actually know that partner has diamond
: void for sure, he could have singleton A. Nothing is 100% certain, but I am
: not stopping short of slam after partner cuebid at 4-level then 5-level.
: Partner must have compensating values, just having diamond void is not good
| b***y
发帖数: 2804 | 28 I think we both agree that first hand is much stronger. The question is
really about 5D cuebid. I think 5D should show that I like the hand (in
light of the bidding so far), so I wouldn't cue 5D with second hand. You
would bid 5D just to show the control on the way, and rely on partner not to
take this as showing extra. Either approach is fine, as long as the
partnership has same understanding of the 5D bid.
【在 p***r 的大作中提到】
: This is about hand evaluation. After you cuebid 4S and 5C, Axxx Axxxx - xxx
: is much stronger than AQxx xxxxx - AKxx. When you have to guess and I have
: an approach to stay out of slams when facing the second hand, I have an edge
: .
:
: that
: grand
: am
: good
| b***y
发帖数: 2804 | 29 谈一下我的想法。从叫牌上来看，北家像是方块缺门。南家梅花缺门的可能性不大（既
没有splinter，也没有fit-showing），但不能完全排除。还有一种可能是北家诈扣方
块。总之首攻拔A的话，可能会成功，也可能送成定约。同伴加倍4S，说明庄家在黑桃
上多半提不通。既然如此，庄家要拿到13墩，只能是通过将吃，首攻将牌就显然了。 | b***y
发帖数: 2804 | 30 以下是实战两手牌，欢迎谈谈你的看法。
AJ732
AQ87652 | | | o*******n
发帖数: 6500 | 31 我的想法和你基本一致
不知道Joel为什么要加倍4S
从John手上的牌来看，只要Joel能控制黑心，将牌首攻是合理的
如果没有加倍的话，我觉得John多半会选择攻草花
【在 b***y 的大作中提到】
: 以下是实战两手牌，欢迎谈谈你的看法。
: AJ732
: AQ87652
| b***y
发帖数: 2804 | 32 首攻梅花也不是没有危险。最怕是北家诈扣。把北家的牌换一张，变成单张方块梅花缺
门，首攻CA就直接摸走了。既然攻哪个A都不保险，同伴黑心如果有控，当然是将牌最
好。我看这副牌的时候首先想到的就是哈曼30年前那一副啊，呵呵。
【在 o*******n 的大作中提到】
: 我的想法和你基本一致
: 不知道Joel为什么要加倍4S
: 从John手上的牌来看，只要Joel能控制黑心，将牌首攻是合理的
: 如果没有加倍的话，我觉得John多半会选择攻草花
| o*******n
发帖数: 6500 | 33 是，这也是个心理战术
【在 b***y 的大作中提到】
: 首攻梅花也不是没有危险。最怕是北家诈扣。把北家的牌换一张，变成单张方块梅花缺
: 门，首攻CA就直接摸走了。既然攻哪个A都不保险，同伴黑心如果有控，当然是将牌最
: 好。我看这副牌的时候首先想到的就是哈曼30年前那一副啊，呵呵。
| b***y
发帖数: 2804 | 34 再聊点花絮。以上这副牌出现在今年GNT冠军赛，是整场比赛最后一副牌，即第64副。
坐南北的是来自第9区的Gary Cohler - David Berkowitz，队友是Jeff Meckstroth,
Eric Rodwell, Michael Becker, Warren Spector，他们是上届GNT冠军。坐东西的是
John Hurd - Joel Woolbridge，非常有前途的两位年轻牌手。
最后还剩四副牌的时候，Spector还落后16 IMP。在第61副，双方都主打4H，乍一看像
是铁牌，但Meckstroth在桌上找到一个不易发现的巧妙防守，成功击败定约，扳回12
IMP。之后是两副平牌。到了最后一副，双方还差4 IMP。这个时候另一张桌子已经打完
，Sam Lev - Brian Glubok叫到并做成一个需要一飞的6H。当时几乎所有人都认为比赛
已经结束，因为对方是par score，除非有奇迹出现（比方对方加倍6H定约），Spector
队应该是回天乏术。谁也没想到居然叫到大满贯，还居然做成。这得要多高的RP啊！ | p***r
发帖数: 20570 | 35 I have to say, south's bidding is very wrong. 4S is a clear overbid, 5C is
wrong, later 7H is a pure gamble.
Of course, west had better pass 4S. It's none of his business to double 4S
with QTx. If west passes 4S, it's clear to lead CA in this layout.
If opps are going to psyche cuebid, they are less likely to psyche cuebid in
side suits, and more likely in your suit, because they don't know who holds
DA and they know that you are more likely to hold CA.
This is a typical latter stage gamble and a good lesson to show why players
shouldn't double too aggressively to lead for a non-existing lead directing
suit and at the same time sold their side Q.
【在 b***y 的大作中提到】
: 以下是实战两手牌，欢迎谈谈你的看法。
: AJ732
: AQ87652
| b***y
发帖数: 2804 | 36 Actually, I think N-S just misbid, instead of intentionally gamble. There is
no reason for them to feel that they have to swing. This is not barometer
game, they had no idea that they were behind by 4 imps. They could easily
lead by 4 imps instead, and only need to push the board. It is possible that
they had misunderstanding over the 5NT bid.
I don't think 4S is a clear overbid. South did have extra value, if 3C only
showed limit+ hand. He didn't know north had void in diamonds. From his
perspective, north may (should) have DA, his diamonds can provide source of
tricks. Yes CK is a bad card, but partner can easily have Axx, AQxxxx, Axx,
x. In fact it is hard to construct a hand that doesn't have SA yet can
cuebid 4D, so SK and DKQ are very good cards to have. For this reason, I
dislike 4D bid, it may mislead partner. I do think South complicated the
sequence by the 5C bid. With all these K, a simple 4NT is much more direct
to the point. The later 5NT - 7H is just them getting off wheels. But still,
they laughed last, which had no justice, but it showed that bridge is a
game of skill plus luck.
【在 p***r 的大作中提到】
: I have to say, south's bidding is very wrong. 4S is a clear overbid, 5C is
: wrong, later 7H is a pure gamble.
: Of course, west had better pass 4S. It's none of his business to double 4S
: with QTx. If west passes 4S, it's clear to lead CA in this layout.
: If opps are going to psyche cuebid, they are less likely to psyche cuebid in
: side suits, and more likely in your suit, because they don't know who holds
: DA and they know that you are more likely to hold CA.
: This is a typical latter stage gamble and a good lesson to show why players
: shouldn't double too aggressively to lead for a non-existing lead directing
: suit and at the same time sold their side Q.
| p***r
发帖数: 20570 | 37 4D doesn't really need any extra here. 4D just shows a hand either with long
C or short C, D control and slam going. Hands like xx AQxxxx AJxx x are
perfectly fine.
Kxx KJx KQxxx Kx contains wastage in C and bad controls. So it is not really
slam going and should just bid 4H.
your example hand gives 3 aces 6 trumps and good hearts, which should
usually move forward after 4H. This hand is so powerful, let me just give
you xxx Kxx KQxxx Kx, 6 is still good. This is not a very high requirement
for a 3C cuebid hand.
is
that
only
of
,
【在 b***y 的大作中提到】
: Actually, I think N-S just misbid, instead of intentionally gamble. There is
: no reason for them to feel that they have to swing. This is not barometer
: game, they had no idea that they were behind by 4 imps. They could easily
: lead by 4 imps instead, and only need to push the board. It is possible that
: they had misunderstanding over the 5NT bid.
: I don't think 4S is a clear overbid. South did have extra value, if 3C only
: showed limit+ hand. He didn't know north had void in diamonds. From his
: perspective, north may (should) have DA, his diamonds can provide source of
: tricks. Yes CK is a bad card, but partner can easily have Axx, AQxxxx, Axx,
: x. In fact it is hard to construct a hand that doesn't have SA yet can
| b***y
发帖数: 2804 | 38 Since 3C cuebid is not game-forcing, West's 4C bid creates annoying problems
. It deprives an entire level of bidding from N-S. Even experts cannot agree
what should 4D from North show. Does it show slam interest, or a secondary
suit (so that partner knows what to do if opponents bid higher), or maybe it
is "last train" (which doesn't even promise diamond control)? We don't know
N-S agreement here, so we are all just speculating here.
But I think South does have enough to bid beyond 4H. Even if partner has xx/
AQxxxx/AJxx/x, 5-level is still safe, since East must have both black aces
for the vulnerable 2C overcall. South actually just needs to find out how
many aces partner has, but he cannot bid 4NT, since he cannot handle a 5S
response. So he cuebid spades instead. This is a good hand to play kickback,
using 4S as RKC.
【在 p***r 的大作中提到】
: 4D doesn't really need any extra here. 4D just shows a hand either with long
: C or short C, D control and slam going. Hands like xx AQxxxx AJxx x are
: perfectly fine.
: Kxx KJx KQxxx Kx contains wastage in C and bad controls. So it is not really
: slam going and should just bid 4H.
: your example hand gives 3 aces 6 trumps and good hearts, which should
: usually move forward after 4H. This hand is so powerful, let me just give
: you xxx Kxx KQxxx Kx, 6 is still good. This is not a very high requirement
: for a 3C cuebid hand.
:
| p***r
发帖数: 20570 | 39 not really, 2C is perfectly fine with QJT x xxx AQJTxx even when red.
problems
agree
secondary
it
know
xx/
【在 b***y 的大作中提到】
: Since 3C cuebid is not game-forcing, West's 4C bid creates annoying problems
: . It deprives an entire level of bidding from N-S. Even experts cannot agree
: what should 4D from North show. Does it show slam interest, or a secondary
: suit (so that partner knows what to do if opponents bid higher), or maybe it
: is "last train" (which doesn't even promise diamond control)? We don't know
: N-S agreement here, so we are all just speculating here.
: But I think South does have enough to bid beyond 4H. Even if partner has xx/
: AQxxxx/AJxx/x, 5-level is still safe, since East must have both black aces
: for the vulnerable 2C overcall. South actually just needs to find out how
: many aces partner has, but he cannot bid 4NT, since he cannot handle a 5S
|
|
