In the second hand, 3C is fine, but what will you bid over a 3D response? Will that be fourth suit? Semi-natural?
I guess I would bid 3N and hope for the best (but I remember how well that usually works out for me).
Bobby WolffOctober 9th, 2022 at 2:56 pm
Hi Jim2,
IMO 3 diamonds by the opener now should be a suit, but, of course, not overall strong enough to offer it over partner’s original first response.
Leaving now the difficult choice by the original responder of a very conservative 3NT or my choice, the aggressive one of 4 diamonds.
At this point and as responder I would now pass 5 diamonds but over any other bid by partner drive to a diamond small slam.
The above is not in stone, but perhaps variable, depending on your expert partner’s tendencies, particularly so, between conservatism and adventuresome.
How is that for protecting myself against all, or at least most, forms of either results or good bridge, likely depending on the result.
You do not know what a blessing your form of torture has taken, since whatever you choose
would likely go set or, just by player’s luck be in the wrong contract, but no, I would NOT pass 3 diamonds, even if you were forced to become my partner.
Yes, 3NT at that point, over 3 diamonds might be the panel’s choice, but, at least to me, it is losing bridge, compared to the alternative.
Hi Bobby,Re your 4D bid over 3D,opener bids 4N,is that to play as he had not cue?
Patrick CheuOctober 9th, 2022 at 4:51 pm
Hi Bobby,Over your 4D,opener bids 4N is that to play as he has not cue?
Iain ClimieOctober 9th, 2022 at 7:19 pm
Hi Bobby,
An interesting point on “Where you Live’s” hand is that partner needs to have few wasted values in spades. The ideal would be J10xxxx Qx AQ10x K or similar. If, as is more likely, partner is going to have (say) SKQJxxx and less outside the results are far less desirable.
Regards,
Iain
Bobby WolffOctober 9th, 2022 at 7:29 pm
Hi Patrick,
Yes. 4NT is somewhat ambiguous, but I would respond to how many aces I had, since he already had the option of bidding 3NT, instead of 3 diamonds, but did not, neighed the bridge loving horse “and that’s not hay”.
Perhaps, as a learning experience, your suggestion could be thought to be the target of choosing too much science, in favor of practicality.
In a cross section of opportunity to go scientific, never forget the downside of misunderstanding, a vicious and quick form of bridge divorces.
Bobby WolffOctober 9th, 2022 at 7:45 pm
Hi Iain,
Why is it that all my select dangerous opponents never having problems with partner always responding as if he knew what his partner was saying or asking instead of wondering?
Oh well, it’s OK now, since I do not have that worry any longer, along with the consternation of grisly answers awaiting.
Patrick CheuOctober 10th, 2022 at 6:07 am
Hi Bobby,There is so much truth in what you say…based on past experiences…Regards Patrick
Iain ClimieOctober 10th, 2022 at 11:27 am
Hi Bobby,
Monday strikes again! My trip into work (during the week I’m a fair distance from home but stop over to avoid too much driving) but my morning trip took far longer than usual today.
Regards,
Iain
Steve ConradOctober 11th, 2022 at 9:18 am
Hello from Serbia (on a riverboat), where they talked about kibbitzing, but not bridge! It’s time for the Tuesday column, so we are now officially 2 columns late. I hope they show asap.
Subscribe to our feed
Bridge-related
In the second hand, 3C is fine, but what will you bid over a 3D response? Will that be fourth suit? Semi-natural?
I guess I would bid 3N and hope for the best (but I remember how well that usually works out for me).
Hi Jim2,
IMO 3 diamonds by the opener now should be a suit, but, of course, not overall strong enough to offer it over partner’s original first response.
Leaving now the difficult choice by the original responder of a very conservative 3NT or my choice, the aggressive one of 4 diamonds.
At this point and as responder I would now pass 5 diamonds but over any other bid by partner drive to a diamond small slam.
The above is not in stone, but perhaps variable, depending on your expert partner’s tendencies, particularly so, between conservatism and adventuresome.
How is that for protecting myself against all, or at least most, forms of either results or good bridge, likely depending on the result.
You do not know what a blessing your form of torture has taken, since whatever you choose
would likely go set or, just by player’s luck be in the wrong contract, but no, I would NOT pass 3 diamonds, even if you were forced to become my partner.
Yes, 3NT at that point, over 3 diamonds might be the panel’s choice, but, at least to me, it is losing bridge, compared to the alternative.
BTW, thanks for your always much valued opinion.
Hi Bobby, Over 4D is 4N by opener to play as he could have cue over it?
Hi Bobby,Re your 4D bid over 3D,opener bids 4N,is that to play as he had not cue?
Hi Bobby,Over your 4D,opener bids 4N is that to play as he has not cue?
Hi Bobby,
An interesting point on “Where you Live’s” hand is that partner needs to have few wasted values in spades. The ideal would be J10xxxx Qx AQ10x K or similar. If, as is more likely, partner is going to have (say) SKQJxxx and less outside the results are far less desirable.
Regards,
Iain
Hi Patrick,
Yes. 4NT is somewhat ambiguous, but I would respond to how many aces I had, since he already had the option of bidding 3NT, instead of 3 diamonds, but did not, neighed the bridge loving horse “and that’s not hay”.
Perhaps, as a learning experience, your suggestion could be thought to be the target of choosing too much science, in favor of practicality.
In a cross section of opportunity to go scientific, never forget the downside of misunderstanding, a vicious and quick form of bridge divorces.
Hi Iain,
Why is it that all my select dangerous opponents never having problems with partner always responding as if he knew what his partner was saying or asking instead of wondering?
Oh well, it’s OK now, since I do not have that worry any longer, along with the consternation of grisly answers awaiting.
Hi Bobby,There is so much truth in what you say…based on past experiences…Regards Patrick
Hi Bobby,
Monday strikes again! My trip into work (during the week I’m a fair distance from home but stop over to avoid too much driving) but my morning trip took far longer than usual today.
Regards,
Iain
Hello from Serbia (on a riverboat), where they talked about kibbitzing, but not bridge! It’s time for the Tuesday column, so we are now officially 2 columns late. I hope they show asap.