IMP Pairs
Both Vul
You, South, hold:
| ♠ | K 10 9 6 5 |
| ♥ | K J 6 3 |
| ♦ | Q 10 |
| ♣ | K J |
| West | North | East | South |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1♦ | 1♠ | Pass | 2♦ |
| 3♣ | Pass | Pass | ? |
Would you bid something else the first time? What do you do now?
The consensus of the comments, and the person who held the South hand, and me, is that this hand should not drive to game. I could live with another try, but would settle for 3♠ myself. Partner held 5=3=3=2 with AQ/A and happened to make.
I play it as a "mixed raise", but think there's a lot of merit to THG's suggestion of using a jump-Q as a 4 card raise with more ambiguous strength (making the jump raise a bit wider-ranging too to take off some of the pressure). I'd have been happier to do that then bid 2♦ the first time around. Or, if it's available, 2NT as a 4+ trump limit raise.
What exactly is the definition of a mixed raise these days? The last former national champion I played with wanted it to show specifically 4 trumps, a shortness, an ace, and a king, or something equivalent I guess. Is that too specific?
ReplyDeleteThat sounds oddly specific to me. I thought the standard conception was just a constructive 4-card raise.
ReplyDeleteWhen mixed raises were first played, they had the definition of shortness somewhere. Here's an example: Kxxx KJxx xxxx x
ReplyDeleteAlong the line, that was deemed too specific. If it seldom comes uP, what good is it? Now the meaning has broadened to show 4 (occ. 5) trumps and 6 to 10- dummy points.
I guess my proposal is that opposite an overcall, it should be a bit sounder than 6, but could be as heavy as something like this, or really any hand with 3 level offense not willing to commit to 4.
ReplyDelete