bid_em_up

Assuming that I am playing Leb, then this is a clear raise to 4S. The 2S bid could have been made originally on something as bad as: K10xxxx x xxxx xx or possibly worse, and yet partner still raised to three. This hand is much better than the example given so 4♠ should certainly have reasonable chances of making.

<Sarcasm on> Having overcalled 2♣ in the other thread on: [hv=s=s1097hj82dkcak9432]133|100|[/hv] I don't see how I can possibly bid anything other than 2♣ now that the heart King is actually guarded AND I also have two more trumps!!! This is a MUCH better overcall!!! </sarcasm off> 3♣ with the hand above (from the other thread). 5♣ with this hand. 4♣ is for wimps. After all, it's only one zero and the likelihood of them having game or slam in a major is simply too high. (Ok, so maybe the sarcasm wasn't totally off) :lol:

Please show me an example hand given the conditions: 1) partner is under the major suit bidder 2) partner likely will not hold 5+ cards in that major (no transfer initially) and, 3) partner is unlikely to have 8+ hcp and four good cards in the major (no stayman) that would be suitable for converting the NT openers "takeout" double to penalty. Given these conditions, I cannot consider this to be an "upside" of playing the NT bidders double as takeout as partner will "never"* hold a hand that is actually capable of converting this double to penalties. * Never say Never, but the chances of this actually occuring will be much more infrequent than chances of the NT opener holding a penalty oriented hand, imo.

Or to put it another way..... North is out of his friggin mind if he thinks he can make 3N with this holding opposite what is a normal takeout double.

I'm aware of this all too well. That's why I asked if it had been resolved. ;) :blink: Personally, I do not like the new web interface, so I don't use it, but thanks for the information. I did not know that could be done. :)

Did this ever get resolved?

Double. This hand is certainly strong enough that we don't mind if it gets left in for penalties. There is another reason for choosing double instead of 4N. Partner doesn't need much more than ♦Qxx or ♣Ace for 6♦/6♠ to have a reasonable shot at making slam opposite this hand. If partner bids 4♠ over the double, we can make some sort of a slam try (personally, I would choose 5H, but there may be better choices). If he simply bids 5♠, then we give up. But looking at the club Ace on this sequence, he should certainly bid 6♣. Now we can show interest in 7 by bidding 6♦. Looking at the diamond Q and the club Ace, or even the AQ of clubs, partner should certainly bid 7. If partner bids 5♦ then he doesn't have 4♠ or 4♣ (he would have bid either of those suits first). Because of this, I am always going to play 6♦, and would again bid 5♥ to see if partner can cue the club Ace. If he does this, I will bid 7♦ on my own, as partner should be able to get club pitches on the spades (he did not take preference to either one of those suits, so he has no more than 3 cards in either). The problem that arises is what to do when partner bids 5C over the double. We can bid 5♦ showing two places to play (♦/♠). This may give up on the diamond slam, but there is still the hope that partner will raise to 6♦ if he is 4-4 in the minors when holding the club Ace as well (he probably should, but whether he does is a different story). If partner corrects to 5♦ to 5♠, I will pass. jmoo.

I've got two bullets in side suits (unlikely to be ruffed), and they are vul., wtp? Lead partner.

BB: 1.USA2 2. China Long 3-4: Italy, USA1 5-8: Brazil, Norway, Egypt, Netherlands VC: 1. USA1 2. Sweden 3-4: USA2, Germany 5-8: China, Japan, Argentina, Egypt Seniors: 1. USA1 2. England 3-4: USA2, Australia 5-8: Japan, Poland, Italy, Indonesia

I would X and then bid 4♠. Given that I chose 1♠ on the first round, this becomes a 4♠, wtp, imo? We know partner is broke. We have no ambitions of slam looking at three small clubs. Bidding 3♠ is simply asking too much for partner to bid 4♠ when he holds: xxx Qxxx xxxx xx he cannot picture the powerhouse we actually hold (even though we have bid the hand strongly, this hand is even better than what X then 3S would show, imo) Take the bull by the horns and bid game yourself. jmoo.

You have to look at your hand in the context of the bidding. Had LHO preempted 2♥ and partner bid an invitational 3♠, I'd be a lot happier to bid 4♠. On the other hand, had the bidding gone 1♣-(p)-1♠-(3♥)-p-(p)-3♠-(p), I would pass as the minor suit honors may not all be working. Partner made a free bid when he did not have to (1♠), and made a jump rebid when he did not have to (3♠). We should infer that partner has at least 6 spades. We know his spades aren't "solid" as we are looking at the king so he should have additional values. Those additional values are unlikely to be wasted in hearts, making all of our cards working. This should make the game better than 50% (and probably higher). Not raising to 4♠ with this hand at IMP's is a losing strategy. (However, I suspect partner had a better call than 3♠) Edit: People still play matchpoints? The above was written with IMP play in mind. I still think it is losing strategy at matchpoints as well, just not quite as strongly.

My first choice is pass, it's not going all pass and I will have more information on the next round. My second choice is double. 1♠ doesn't even enter into the equation.

Sure, but East made two of them, and West only made one. 67% East 33% West :)

The train goes off the tracks on responders 4♠ bid, imo. It makes any competent cuebidding sequence impossible. So 4♠ is the bid that gets my vote.

This hand can just bid 1NT (the first time). Pass on 2NT with 14-15 opposite 6. 1♠-1NT; 2NT 18-19 Of course, it can. However, there are those who still refuse to open 1N when holding a five card major suit, and it is those people who will bid 2N when holding 15-17 after opening 1M.

Very nice. Except....if the K popped at trick 3, you now have 3 spades 2 diamonds 3 hearts and a club by force (rho must hold the club A). So there is no need to mess with the diamonds.

lol. You must play vs. some tough beginners. Any beginner/intermediate that I know of would not be capable of making this bid (at least not intentionally), nor would they be capable of making this assumption to try to make the hand. So how about assuming something a little more "normal" and working from there? :P

If partner held 2-0-5-6, he should have bid 3♦ completing his distribution, and not 3♠. So this holding is out also, imo.

He's being silly.... (I hope). You bid 5H and get hammered like a normal person. Wtp?

This one is easy to answer. I do not agree with the 3N bid. Partner hammered 2C and we have no clue what his hand actually is. We have an extremely good hand for defending 2C x'd and should be licking our chops at the huge penalty we are about to extract from the opponents. So, given the auction, I would pass and defend. However, I will assume you have seen partner's penalty doubles before, as this looks nothing like what I would expect to find in partner's hand. Now that we can see dummy, it is certainly clear we'd rather be in 3N as it is unlikely that we are beating 2C by 4 tricks, which is what it would take for us to outscore 3N (assuming we can make it, and I think we can...).

Really? And X Axx AKxxx AJxx is supposed to do what? Pass? Double 2S*? Jump to 4C bypassing 3N? Bid 3N directly and miss a possible club slam? Get real. It does not have to be 5/5 or 6/4. *your methods may call for an X of 2S. However, this is the BIL forum and I would not expect this to be a standard treatment here.

Phil's tip (tap) is the equivalent of playing a "forcing" game. This is where you "force" declarer to ruff in the long trump hand to make his trump length less than or equal to your trump length, so that eventually you can draw declarers trump and then cash your side suit winners. Yes, that is a reasonable assumption. And if we are positive that partner is 5+♦ 4♣ I might agree with you. Unfortunately, partner may well be 4♦ 5♣ on this hand which makes clubs the most likely suit that a force will be available in. The other reason for still choosing clubs is that if partner is 5♦-4♣, I want to force declarer in our SHORTER suit, allowing more diamond tricks to be cashed after drawing trumps. I double. I lead a club. It won't be the first time I've had a doubled part-score made against me, but the vulnerable penalty is just too juicy at IMP's to pass up. I expect to beat this by at least two tricks unless partner is yanking my chain with some 5-5 rule of 20 opening bid, and if he was I hope he has enough sense to complete his hand pattern by bidding 4C. jmoo.

Ummm, I would think that calling the rude players "flaming a..holes" is also against the rules. Isn't it? (I understand your intent...but...) :)

I don't know what it was before, but I pass with this one also.

Maybe it's just me, but I think Exclusion requires a jump to the 5 level. 5H over 3N would be exclusion, but not here.