i****e
发帖数: 642 | 1 All red.
You LHO Pard RHO
P P 1H P
1S P 3D P
?
You hold
A532
65
J84
A872 | m****r
发帖数: 6639 | 2 3n
【在 i****e 的大作中提到】
: All red.
: You LHO Pard RHO
: P P 1H P
: 1S P 3D P
: ?
: You hold
: A532
: 65
: J84
: A872
| b***y
发帖数: 2804 | 3 3H。两顶边花A适合花色定约且可能有满贯，而作为3NT可能止张太薄。先听听同伴什么
牌吧。还有，是IMP还是MP啊？ | i****e
发帖数: 642 | 4 IMP.
It is up to the agreement. But I would think 3H show 3-card, or doubleton
with an honor.
【在 b***y 的大作中提到】
: 3H。两顶边花A适合花色定约且可能有满贯，而作为3NT可能止张太薄。先听听同伴什么
: 牌吧。还有，是IMP还是MP啊？
| b***y
发帖数: 2804 | 5 3H can almost never show 3-card in this sequence. You would have either
raised to 2H earlier, or started with 1NT.
It is impractical to require honor-doubleton. In sequences like 1H-1S-2D-2H,
there is no such requirement, why require it with 1H-1S-3D? Plus, 3H saves
room, it should be the default bid.
【在 i****e 的大作中提到】
: IMP.
: It is up to the agreement. But I would think 3H show 3-card, or doubleton
: with an honor.
| i****e
发帖数: 642 | 6
Yes, you will raise 2H directly with hand worthy one bid. For better hands,
like Axxx xxx xx AJxx, you may like to bid 1S, since it may be too weak to
bid 2H , depending on system.
2H,
saves
These two sequences are very different. The second one is at higher and
forcing level, so it is more important to set the trump, while 3H may be
setting wrong trump. It saves room for sure. It is hard for a system to take
care of everything. Maybe it is important to decide what to give up :)
After you bid 3H, pard bid 4D. It seems you are on the right track. What do
you bid next?
【在 b***y 的大作中提到】
: 3H can almost never show 3-card in this sequence. You would have either
: raised to 2H earlier, or started with 1NT.
: It is impractical to require honor-doubleton. In sequences like 1H-1S-2D-2H,
: there is no such requirement, why require it with 1H-1S-3D? Plus, 3H saves
: room, it should be the default bid.
| b***y
发帖数: 2804 | 7 If you had a hand that you intended to invite in hearts (plan to bid 1S then
3H), you can bid 4H after 3D. This is a value-showing bid.
The main point is, after jump-shift (which consumes space), you need a
waiting bid like 3H. It is ambiguous, but it makes other bids more defined.
1H-1S-3D, you have:
3S = natural, often 6+ or 5 good ones
3NT = soft value on S and C
4C = cuebid for diamonds
4D = diamond raise but not suitable for 4C cuebid
4H = limit raise in hearts
4NT = RKC in hearts (to RKC in D, bid 4D to set trump first)
If you require 3H to set trump, you will have impossible bid for many other
hands. It's unlikely that you can set H as trump anyway, since you won't
often have 3-card support when bidding comes to this. This is at most a
preference, so you might as well treat it as a general waiting bid.
Once partner bids 4D (which should be natural), slam is likely. Mark time
with 4S, which has to be a cuebid now.
【在 i****e 的大作中提到】
:
: Yes, you will raise 2H directly with hand worthy one bid. For better hands,
: like Axxx xxx xx AJxx, you may like to bid 1S, since it may be too weak to
: bid 2H , depending on system.
: 2H,
: saves
: These two sequences are very different. The second one is at higher and
: forcing level, so it is more important to set the trump, while 3H may be
: setting wrong trump. It saves room for sure. It is hard for a system to take
: care of everything. Maybe it is important to decide what to give up :)
| i****e
发帖数: 642 | 8 Pard holds
T6
AKQJ7
AKT75
4
Do you agree with 3D and 4D? If yes, what do you bid after 4S?
then
.
【在 b***y 的大作中提到】
: If you had a hand that you intended to invite in hearts (plan to bid 1S then
: 3H), you can bid 4H after 3D. This is a value-showing bid.
: The main point is, after jump-shift (which consumes space), you need a
: waiting bid like 3H. It is ambiguous, but it makes other bids more defined.
: 1H-1S-3D, you have:
: 3S = natural, often 6+ or 5 good ones
: 3NT = soft value on S and C
: 4C = cuebid for diamonds
: 4D = diamond raise but not suitable for 4C cuebid
: 4H = limit raise in hearts
| i****e
发帖数: 642 | 9 Without special agreement, 4H and 4NT may be explained differently.
If 4H shows limit raise by agreement, then 3H doesn't have to set up trump.
But apparently, this 4H consumes room for slam bidding. But at least this
design uses 4H bid, otherwise there is no meaningful 4H bid with this
sequence.
4NT RKC, without explicit trump, should assume the last bid suit as trump,
in this case it is D. The same principle is for 4C cue bid, which is for D,
rather than H. It seems confusing to treat 4C and 4NT for different trumps.
then
.
【在 b***y 的大作中提到】
: If you had a hand that you intended to invite in hearts (plan to bid 1S then
: 3H), you can bid 4H after 3D. This is a value-showing bid.
: The main point is, after jump-shift (which consumes space), you need a
: waiting bid like 3H. It is ambiguous, but it makes other bids more defined.
: 1H-1S-3D, you have:
: 3S = natural, often 6+ or 5 good ones
: 3NT = soft value on S and C
: 4C = cuebid for diamonds
: 4D = diamond raise but not suitable for 4C cuebid
: 4H = limit raise in hearts
| m****r
发帖数: 6639 | 10 我居然看懂了。
then
.
【在 b***y 的大作中提到】
: If you had a hand that you intended to invite in hearts (plan to bid 1S then
: 3H), you can bid 4H after 3D. This is a value-showing bid.
: The main point is, after jump-shift (which consumes space), you need a
: waiting bid like 3H. It is ambiguous, but it makes other bids more defined.
: 1H-1S-3D, you have:
: 3S = natural, often 6+ or 5 good ones
: 3NT = soft value on S and C
: 4C = cuebid for diamonds
: 4D = diamond raise but not suitable for 4C cuebid
: 4H = limit raise in hearts
| | | b***y
发帖数: 2804 | 11 The reason why 4NT is designed as RKC for H, is because you could have set
up diamond as trump by bidding 4D first, but you don't have room to set up
hearts as trump (4H will not be forcing).
For me, the first principle is, if you have a chance to set up trump before
using 4NT, then 4NT is not RKC for that suit. For example 1H-4NT, that is
not RKC for me, since I could have made a forcing raise first, followed by
4NT. Similarly, 1H-1S-2D-4NT is quantitative (balanced 19-ish). I think 1H-
1S-3D-4NT could be used as quantitative too, but that is less useful than
RKC in hearts (but that needs to be agreed upon by partnership). Only when
you don't have a way to set up trump, then 4NT is RKC in last-bid suit.
With the actual hand, I agree with 3D bid. 4D is also OK. After 4S, I play
that 4NT is not keycard, but rather kind of "last train", shows a forward-
going hand. If you don't have that available, then I think it is wise to
just bid 5D, trusting that partner will carry on to slam holding 2 black
aces and DQ.
【在 i****e 的大作中提到】
: Without special agreement, 4H and 4NT may be explained differently.
: If 4H shows limit raise by agreement, then 3H doesn't have to set up trump.
: But apparently, this 4H consumes room for slam bidding. But at least this
: design uses 4H bid, otherwise there is no meaningful 4H bid with this
: sequence.
: 4NT RKC, without explicit trump, should assume the last bid suit as trump,
: in this case it is D. The same principle is for 4C cue bid, which is for D,
: rather than H. It seems confusing to treat 4C and 4NT for different trumps.
:
: then
| b***y
发帖数: 2804 | 12 Is that a compliment to me? ~~~~
【在 m****r 的大作中提到】
: 我居然看懂了。
:
: then
: .
| p******e
发帖数: 1151 | 13 这个牌要叫好一定要有约定的。假设IMP。 个人看法：
1. 3nt不太好， 这个牌叫死了，完全失去了满贯的意愿和可能。同伴在你pass之后跳
叫3D， 基本上是逼叫到局的实力。 两个黑花的A和有限的方块支持还是值得试探的。
而且即使没有满贯， 4H和5D也是不错的选择。所以我觉得3nt应该比不上4D （虽然3nt
有可能是最佳定约）。
2. 3H 是一个自然的选择。但是没有比较好的约定和讨论， 同伴通常就直接4H了－－
－后面就不是很好继续了。
3. 如果D的支持好一点， QXX， 或者JXXX， 我会叫4C。 这个牌我选择4D。 | b***y
发帖数: 2804 | 14 3D不保证5张，一般直接4D需要4张支持。
【在 p******e 的大作中提到】
: 这个牌要叫好一定要有约定的。假设IMP。 个人看法：
: 1. 3nt不太好， 这个牌叫死了，完全失去了满贯的意愿和可能。同伴在你pass之后跳
: 叫3D， 基本上是逼叫到局的实力。 两个黑花的A和有限的方块支持还是值得试探的。
: 而且即使没有满贯， 4H和5D也是不错的选择。所以我觉得3nt应该比不上4D （虽然3nt
: 有可能是最佳定约）。
: 2. 3H 是一个自然的选择。但是没有比较好的约定和讨论， 同伴通常就直接4H了－－
: －后面就不是很好继续了。
: 3. 如果D的支持好一点， QXX， 或者JXXX， 我会叫4C。 这个牌我选择4D。
| v**********e
发帖数: 1295 | 15 For given two hands, I think 5D is good for IMP and 4H is good for MP.
The sequence could be:
1H 1S;
3D 3H;
4D 4S;
5D //
After 4D, the opener almost have no extra strength for slam try.
【在 i****e 的大作中提到】
: Pard holds
: T6
: AKQJ7
: AKT75
: 4
: Do you agree with 3D and 4D? If yes, what do you bid after 4S?
:
: then
: .
| i****e
发帖数: 642 | 16 Yes, 5D seems the good spot from two hands. 6D has some play if DQ on side,
or without spade lead (50% each for S and C lead), while 6H is much worse
than 6D.
But the 5D bidding is far from scientific. If there is a way for the
responder to show fit and slam interest, and the open initiates RKC, it will
be easy to land to correct level, and can avoid a lot of guess work.
For the real result at table, due to the extremely bad split in red suits (H
5-1, D 0-5), the final 4H went one down. It could make with careful play.
3NT is ice cold, but that is not the point for this discussion. Mapcar would
win this hand happily :)
A532
65
J84
A872
KQ874 J9
T9842 3
- Q9632
T63 KQJ95
T6
AKQJ7
AKT75
4
1H 1S
3D 3H
4H
Lead: SK
【在 v**********e 的大作中提到】
: For given two hands, I think 5D is good for IMP and 4H is good for MP.
: The sequence could be:
: 1H 1S;
: 3D 3H;
: 4D 4S;
: 5D //
: After 4D, the opener almost have no extra strength for slam try.
| b***y
发帖数: 2804 | 17 4H打法蛮有意思的，可以作为双明手题。~~
【在 i****e 的大作中提到】
: Yes, 5D seems the good spot from two hands. 6D has some play if DQ on side,
: or without spade lead (50% each for S and C lead), while 6H is much worse
: than 6D.
: But the 5D bidding is far from scientific. If there is a way for the
: responder to show fit and slam interest, and the open initiates RKC, it will
: be easy to land to correct level, and can avoid a lot of guess work.
: For the real result at table, due to the extremely bad split in red suits (H
: 5-1, D 0-5), the final 4H went one down. It could make with careful play.
: 3NT is ice cold, but that is not the point for this discussion. Mapcar would
: win this hand happily :)
| v**********e
发帖数: 1295 | 18 With such hands, opps should bid something (i.e., sandwich 1NT)
,
will
(H
would
【在 i****e 的大作中提到】
: Yes, 5D seems the good spot from two hands. 6D has some play if DQ on side,
: or without spade lead (50% each for S and C lead), while 6H is much worse
: than 6D.
: But the 5D bidding is far from scientific. If there is a way for the
: responder to show fit and slam interest, and the open initiates RKC, it will
: be easy to land to correct level, and can avoid a lot of guess work.
: For the real result at table, due to the extremely bad split in red suits (H
: 5-1, D 0-5), the final 4H went one down. It could make with careful play.
: 3NT is ice cold, but that is not the point for this discussion. Mapcar would
: win this hand happily :)
| p***r
发帖数: 20570 | 19 I don't really think 3H is a good bid at all. 3NT is the natural description
for this hand, no much extra, not fit, a stopper in the unbid suit.
,
will
(H
would
【在 i****e 的大作中提到】
: Yes, 5D seems the good spot from two hands. 6D has some play if DQ on side,
: or without spade lead (50% each for S and C lead), while 6H is much worse
: than 6D.
: But the 5D bidding is far from scientific. If there is a way for the
: responder to show fit and slam interest, and the open initiates RKC, it will
: be easy to land to correct level, and can avoid a lot of guess work.
: For the real result at table, due to the extremely bad split in red suits (H
: 5-1, D 0-5), the final 4H went one down. It could make with careful play.
: 3NT is ice cold, but that is not the point for this discussion. Mapcar would
: win this hand happily :)
|
|
