Choice Of Games Pleasanton Sectional - Bidding Poll
#2
Posted 2008-January-27, 01:42
- hrothgar
#3
Posted 2008-January-27, 01:45
#4
Posted 2008-January-27, 01:52
There was I think almost this exact same hand in one of the RP bidding polls a few years ago where he argued for 4♦, although I think that was imps. Just food for thought.
#5
Posted 2008-January-27, 01:56
#6 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2008-January-27, 01:59
#7
Posted 2008-January-27, 04:10
#8
Posted 2008-January-27, 08:02
Harald
#11
Posted 2008-January-27, 13:25
It seems useful to have more forcing bids than just 3S. For example, here you don't want to bid 3S as it leaves partner completely helpless.
- hrothgar
#12
Posted 2008-January-27, 13:28
#13
Posted 2008-January-27, 13:43
FrancesHinden, on Jan 27 2008, 07:07 PM, said:
Why is 3H forcing?
I disagree with Han, it is forcing because otherwise you would had bid 2♠ the round before.
I also feel like 3♥ shows 3+ cards, I'd be the only one to try 3♠ followed by 4♥.
#14
Posted 2008-January-27, 13:44
FrancesHinden, on Jan 27 2008, 08:07 PM, said:
Why is 3H forcing?
You could have supported directly with 2♥ competitive or 2♠ inv+ with 3-card support. So this should be forcing. Se also Han's comment above. Sure 3NT is also possible, but I prefer to let partner participate in the decision.
Harald
#15 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2008-January-27, 17:10
FrancesHinden, on Jan 27 2008, 02:07 PM, said:
Why is 3H forcing?
pfft...english people.
#16
Posted 2008-January-28, 02:04
Fluffy, on Jan 28 2008, 04:43 AM, said:
you are not alone. I do the same.
Roland
Sanity Check: Failure (Fluffy)
More system is not the answer...

Help

1♥ (1♠) 2♦ (Pass)
3♦ (Pass) ???