In sample 3 of Harry’s 2023 Lessons, I am a bit uncomfortable with the auction given. Don’t you think at least one if not both of South’s cue bids should show a first-round control? I’ve certainly experienced the occasional disasters when partner initiates a que bidding sequence by showing a second-round control, and I’ve assumed it to be a first.
Stephen Svelmoe
July 29, 2023 at 11:21 am
In sample 1 of Harry’s Lessons Summer 2023, I can’t see bidding anything other than 3 spades with these values. There is some concern, of course, that both North and East will have singleton hearts and that you will need to rough some of yours in dummy. With East playing after North this situation is not ideal but, I have found that it does not pay in bridge to be overly pessimistic.
Harry
July 30, 2023 at 8:47 am
Steve,
For sample 1 suggest you visualize how well defense might prevail in a contract of 3 spades.
Harry
July 30, 2023 at 8:53 am
Follow up for Steve on sample 1: Since it looks like there is no game in the hand, why not bid what you are reasonably sure you can make? Or, at least go set no more than one trick? BTW, any reason you should pass for penalty?
Harry
July 30, 2023 at 9:07 am
Steve, for sample 3 most experts now show second or first round controls (no more than one loser in the suit) when cue bidding to invite slam. I was not convinced of this myself until a few months ago when I read chapter 20 of revised edition of 25 Bridge Conventions You Should Know. Also, take a look at Larry Cohen: https://www.larryco.com/bridge-articles/control-bidding
Stephen Svelmoe
July 30, 2023 at 2:37 pm
I am surprised that you are so pessimistic about the possibility of game on sample 3. Partner could have quite a good hand in this sequence, but not enough to bid over 2 spades. I can see bidding that might be indicated at MPs, but I am more of an IMP player.
Passing 2 hearts doubled is a possibility, but partner is not going to like it if that contract comes rolling home when 6 spades was on. KQxx void xxx AKQJxx. I’d be interested to learn what others thought of this problem.
Stephen Svelmoe
July 30, 2023 at 2:47 pm
I am just now resurrecting by bridge career here in Hilo after it being in hiatus since 1989. I played mainly in the SF Bay Area from the late 60s until then. I’ll be attending your lessons as often as possible and hope that we will have a chance to chat about modern slam bidding technique and perhaps other matters.
As I mentioned, I did not have good results cueing second-round controls in an unbid suit, but that may have been simply poor judgement on partner’s part (not mine, of course, Ha, Ha).
Thank you for the link to Larry Cohen’s website; I have signed up for his newsletter.
Harry
July 30, 2023 at 5:43 pm
Steve, I see that sample 1 should make for a fun discussion. Thanks for your input.
Stephen Svelmoe
July 29, 2023 at 11:10 am
In sample 3 of Harry’s 2023 Lessons, I am a bit uncomfortable with the auction given. Don’t you think at least one if not both of South’s cue bids should show a first-round control? I’ve certainly experienced the occasional disasters when partner initiates a que bidding sequence by showing a second-round control, and I’ve assumed it to be a first.
Stephen Svelmoe
July 29, 2023 at 11:21 am
In sample 1 of Harry’s Lessons Summer 2023, I can’t see bidding anything other than 3 spades with these values. There is some concern, of course, that both North and East will have singleton hearts and that you will need to rough some of yours in dummy. With East playing after North this situation is not ideal but, I have found that it does not pay in bridge to be overly pessimistic.
Harry
July 30, 2023 at 8:47 am
Steve,
For sample 1 suggest you visualize how well defense might prevail in a contract of 3 spades.
Harry
July 30, 2023 at 8:53 am
Follow up for Steve on sample 1: Since it looks like there is no game in the hand, why not bid what you are reasonably sure you can make? Or, at least go set no more than one trick? BTW, any reason you should pass for penalty?
Harry
July 30, 2023 at 9:07 am
Steve, for sample 3 most experts now show second or first round controls (no more than one loser in the suit) when cue bidding to invite slam. I was not convinced of this myself until a few months ago when I read chapter 20 of revised edition of 25 Bridge Conventions You Should Know. Also, take a look at Larry Cohen:
https://www.larryco.com/bridge-articles/control-bidding
Stephen Svelmoe
July 30, 2023 at 2:37 pm
I am surprised that you are so pessimistic about the possibility of game on sample 3. Partner could have quite a good hand in this sequence, but not enough to bid over 2 spades. I can see bidding that might be indicated at MPs, but I am more of an IMP player.
Passing 2 hearts doubled is a possibility, but partner is not going to like it if that contract comes rolling home when 6 spades was on. KQxx void xxx AKQJxx. I’d be interested to learn what others thought of this problem.
Stephen Svelmoe
July 30, 2023 at 2:47 pm
I am just now resurrecting by bridge career here in Hilo after it being in hiatus since 1989. I played mainly in the SF Bay Area from the late 60s until then. I’ll be attending your lessons as often as possible and hope that we will have a chance to chat about modern slam bidding technique and perhaps other matters.
As I mentioned, I did not have good results cueing second-round controls in an unbid suit, but that may have been simply poor judgement on partner’s part (not mine, of course, Ha, Ha).
Thank you for the link to Larry Cohen’s website; I have signed up for his newsletter.
Harry
July 30, 2023 at 5:43 pm
Steve, I see that sample 1 should make for a fun discussion. Thanks for your input.