BPO-005B

[inquiry]

This hand was also from the Gov BI Cup quarter finals 1A between Poland playing Chinese Taipai. I choose this hand because of the difference of opinion between the two expert partnerships when holding this hand (true they could well have been playing different systems)... The polish expert holding this hand (Jagniewski) choose a "careful" pass over the raise to 2♥. The Chinese Taipai expert (Chen went with the game try -- obviously help suit) game try of 3♦, and ended up quickly in a hopeless (as the cards lay) 4♥ contract.

 

In the quaterfinals 1B, between Sweden and Indonesia Open, the star for Team Indonesia (Panelewen) choose to bid 3♣ as a game try, and ended up in 3♥ down one. While his counterpart (Sundelin for Sweden) simply leaped to 4♥.

 

At the time, there was some discussion of if Drury was used or not at the Taipai table. Turns out most of "responders" values where in spades (he had KJx) so short suit game try would have worked out well here (for those wanting two way game tries after 1M-2M. On the actual hand, even 3♥ is too high (two club ruffs, and three aces to lose). Still the drury/no drury question made it worth considering. It was also interesting that all four experts choose a different bid with the same "basic" auction. Thus, I thought this would be a good hand for an open discussion (Although I am not sure we will learn a lot from this one hand).

 

I have to admit to liking the pass option, but maybe I rely too heavily upon drury, which makes P=1M=2M show little more than 13 cards and three card support.

[hrothgar]

This hand was also from the Gov BI Cup quarter finals 1A between Poland playing Chinese Taipai. I choose this hand because of the difference of opinion between the two expert partnerships when holding this hand (true they could well have been playing different systems)... The polish expert holding this hand (Jagniewski) choose a "careful" pass over the raise to 2♥. The Chinese Taipai expert (Chen went with the game try -- obviously help suit) game try of 3♦, and ended up quickly in a hopeless (as the cards lay) 4♥ contract.

 

In the quaterfinals 1B, between Sweden and Indonesia Open, the star for Team Indonesia (Panelewen) choose to bid 3♣ as a game try, and ended up in 3♥ down one. While his counterpart (Sundelin for Sweden) simply leaped to 4♥.

 

At the time, there was some discussion of if Drury was used or not at the Taipai table. Turns out most of "responders" values where in spades (he had KJx) so short suit game try would have worked out well here (for those wanting two way game tries after 1M-2M. On the actual hand, even 3♥ is too high (two club ruffs, and three aces to lose). Still the drury/no drury question made it worth considering. It was also interesting that all four experts choose a different bid with the same "basic" auction. Thus, I thought this would be a good hand for an open discussion (Although I am not sure we will learn a lot from this one hand).

 

I have to admit to liking the pass option, but maybe I rely too heavily upon drury, which makes P=1M=2M show little more than 13 cards and three card support.

It would be interesting to see the complete hand.

In particular, do the opponents have a Spade partial?

[inquiry]

It would be interesting to see the complete hand.

In particular, do the opponents have a Spade partial?

GOV BI Cup Quarter Finals 1B the hand was the board 13.

[Guest Jlall]

Could someone explain why here that 3♣ is more appropriate?

 

Thanks

 

Steve

I chose 3C (as opposed to 3D) for a few reasons. One, lets assume partner is to have Kxxx in a suit. Would we rather it be in clubs or diamonds? I think clubs, because you can set up your fourth round (if the suit breaks 3-2). The length is not as useful opposite diamonds. Similarly, if he were to have Kx in a suit, I would rather it be clubs as I have a chance for 2 ruffs. If he were to have Kxx in a suit, I would prefer clubs as a 3-3 break or a ruff would yield an trick, but in diamonds it would not be that great.

 

Another advantage of 3C is that with diamond values partner has room to bid 3D, whereas if we bid 3D he cannot bid 3C to show club values (obviously).

[hrothgar]

It would be interesting to see the complete hand.

In particular, do the opponents have a Spade partial?

GOV BI Cup Quarter Finals 1B the hand was the board 13.

East-West do have an 8 card Spade fit. 2 Spades certainly has chances.

 

Its unclear whether West would necessarly chose to balance if 2♥ gets passed arround to him. However, we can't simply assume that pass will permit us to make +110 and bidding results in - 100

 

As I noted originally, the hand is worth a game invite. However, I'm not bidding 3♣ because I expect to make game.

[inquiry]

It would be interesting to see the complete hand.

In particular, do the opponents have a Spade partial?

GOV BI Cup Quarter Finals 1B the hand was the board 13.

East-West do have an 8 card Spade fit. 2 Spades certainly has chances.

 

Its unclear whether West would necessarly chose to balance if 2♥ gets passed arround to him. However, we can't simply assume that pass will permit us to make +110 and bidding results in - 100

 

As I noted originally, the hand is worth a game invite. However, I'm not bidding 3♣ because I expect to make game.

As noted before, we are not here to "result" the hand. But rather to find the right bid. Of course the potential for them to make 2♠ might influence your bid, but then you have the 1H=2H=3H bid available as well. I suspect 3♣ will garner a lot of support from the experts. And as noted, since we will count the bids from the actual event...we already have FOUR different bids in the result. :-)

[cherdano]

I have to admit to liking the pass option, but maybe I rely too heavily upon drury, which makes P=1M=2M show little more than 13 cards and three card support.

I don't know about "too much" but I am pretty sure that given your 1st/2nd seat drury, the upper limit for 1M-2M in your style is a lot lower than for most other people (even those who do have 2♣ as a multi-way bid, including a 3-card invite in the major). Probably the same is true with a passed hand with your style vs standard drury.

 

Arend

[Walddk]

Half an hour ago I had a post here as a reply to Ben's question about the Sundelin-Sylvan system (Drury or not). I can't find it any more, nor can I find Ben's question. Have they been deleted, and if so, why?

 

Roland

[Walddk]

Sorry, I posted it in another thread although it seems to belong here.

 

Roland

[Double !]

I believe that I elected to Pass (albeit with increasing trepidation as I read everyone's postings). My thinking, right or wrong, was influenced a lot by the fact that the opps, so far, hadn't bid spades (if only as a lead-director) leading me to suspect that P might well have a totally worthless spade honor and that even the 3-level might not be safe. Oh, well, another missed vul game at imps for me (and zero points), but at least I rate to get a plus score :)

[Al_U_Card]

Since pard did NOT bid 1S, his values (such as they may be) are in your suits. I would happily bid 3C as a long suit game try and expect to make opposite a decent 8 count that would accept.

[Double !]

IMO, pard should not respond 1 spade with heart support as a passed hand because it isn't forcing. 3rd seat opener is permitted to pass 1 spade. So, I don't believe that I can take the inference that you suggest.

[Al_U_Card]

IMO, pard should not respond 1 spade with heart support as a passed hand because it isn't forcing. 3rd seat opener is permitted to pass 1 spade. So, I don't believe that I can take the inference that you suggest.

Sometimes, when he has four, he will bid them to forestall the opps eventual balance in Spades......and to warn you against hoping he has his cards in your suits.

[mikeh]

I passed, and none of the comments supporting bidding persuades me.

 

It seems that most of the bidders were not really trying for game: they were more concerned with preventing the opps from balancing in ♠

 

1. There is a good chance that 2♥ will be passed out. LHO couldn't bid 1♠, and this is not matchpoints. The silence of the opps suggests that partner has some stuff in ♠.

 

2. Partner may be sitting there with KJ109 of ♠ or better and be about to clobber them: you have enough defence to be very happy to defend if he doubles.

He should NOT bid 1♠ with the correct values for 2♥. He should NOT be thinking about a lead-director against silent opps after your 1♥ bid. Presumably his lead director is intended to be useful against a minor suit contract. 2♥ might not be a lead director, but it is far, far more likely to make such a lead directing bid irrelevant: the opps have passed and they are going to balance, at imps, at the 3-level? Get a grip on reality, folks :) . It may happen, but should you and your partner plan your constructive auctions around that ?

 

3. You can still bid if they balance and partner passes.

 

4. You are not allowed to make your game try with a signal 'just kidding'. Partner will take you seriously and put you in game on many, many hands on which you fail.

 

5. Partner may actually hold a poor hand, and 3♥ fails.

 

I appreciate that the tactical aspects of bidding are sometimes overlooked, but bidding here demonstrates the opposite approach. You should not change your constructive sequences out of fear that the so-far silent opps not only can do something that works, but actually will do something that works

[Guest Jlall]

I game tried, because I thought it was worth a game try :)

[Walddk]

I passed because I don't think it's worth a game try. A hand that could do nothing more than raising to 2♥ (no Drury) can't cover three of my six losers. 3♥ is in jeopardy.

 

Roland

[Guest Jlall]

A hand that could do nothing more than raising to 2♥ (no Drury) can't cover three of my six losers.

Warning: Carefully constructed hands approaching.

 

Perhaps you worded it poorly and meant "rates not to be able to cover three of my 6 losers." There are quite a few hand types that can make game such as:

 

xxx

Qxxx

KJTx

xx

 

xxxx

9xxx

KTx

Kx

 

xxx

Qxx

xx

KQxxx

 

etc etc, I could go on but it's pointless. You'll note the HCP are 6, 6, and 7. There are no stiffs. Game is cold on 2 hands and very good on the other one. Pass may well be the best hand, but I don't think its fair to say a 2H bid cannot produce a game opposite this hand.

[hrothgar]

2. Partner may be sitting there with KJ109 of ♠ or better and be about to clobber them: you have enough defence to be very happy to defend if he doubles.

He should NOT bid 1♠ with the correct values for 2♥. He should NOT be thinking about a lead-director against silent opps after your 1♥ bid. Presumably his lead director is intended to be useful against a minor suit contract. 2♥ might not be a lead director, but it is far, far more likely to make such a lead directing bid irrelevant: the opps have passed and they are going to balance, at imps, at the 3-level? Get a grip on reality, folks :D . It may happen, but should you and your partner plan your constructive auctions around that ?

The cult of the constructive auction rears its silly little head once more...

 

I don't plan my bidding based on the assumption that the opponents will go quietly. I most certainly don't do so when I'm contemplating a 2♥ contract sitting on a stiff Spade.

 

As to your last sentence:

 

If you check my original posting I argued in favor of a 3♣ based on the following logic:

 

1. I'm short in Spades. Therefore, there is a real risk that the opponents can safely balance in 2♠

 

2. A 3♣ long suit game try will work well since regardless of what hand type partner holds. If he is strong in Clubs, the opponents have a good Spade sac. If he is weak in clubs, we'll rest in 3♠...

 

I think I did a pretty good job anticipating the key points of the hand.

 

Oh yeah. Partner is sitting on pretty good spades (KJ62).

2♠ has a decent chance of making...

[Walddk]

A hand that could do nothing more than raising to 2♥ (no Drury) can't cover three of my six losers.

Warning: Carefully constructed hands approaching.

 

Perhaps you worded it poorly and meant "rates not to be able to cover three of my 6 losers." There are quite a few hand types that can make game such as:

 

xxx

Qxxx

KJTx

xx

 

xxxx

9xxx

KTx

Kx

 

xxx

Qxx

xx

KQxxx

 

etc etc, I could go on but it's pointless. You'll note the HCP are 6, 6, and 7. There are no stiffs. Game is cold on 2 hands and very good on the other one. Pass may well be the best hand, but I don't think its fair to say a 2H bid cannot produce a game opposite this hand.

You gave partner ZERO hcp in spades in all examples, and yet we didn't hear anything from the opponents. They have 19-20 hcp and AKQJ of spades. You think they would be passing when in two of your examples they have 9 spades between them?

 

Dream on Justin :D

 

Roland

[Guest Jlall]

yes believe it or not I believe the opps do not always bid when they have 9 spades. RHO is a passed hand and he may have found it difficult to bid over 2H in a live auction. The second hand contained only 4 spades, and you can add as much spade values as you like to the hands to make them a non drury, there's still a lot of room.

[inquiry]

By popular demand earlier in these threads I will not include votes from the table in the scores. Oh well, was a cute idea (would not help much anyway on this hand, as there were bids of Pass, 3C, 3D, and 4H at the actual table). Our panelist were divided into two groups. Those who had heard enough with 2♥ and choose the careful pass. And those who issued a game try, some choosing clubs, come choosing diamonds to make the try. Let’s hear from the winning majority (actually we have a tie here, but I get to assign the scores, soo….)

 

FRED Pass - slightly conservative, but the opps' silence suggests that partner has length and strength in spades so there is a good chance that our hands don't fit well. If we were vul I might try 3C. Hard to answer this question properly without knowing how strong partner has to be to use Drury and if 2H is "semi-contructive" in this position."

 

Fluffy "Pass, I don't find any hand that partner can have without 4♥, that will make game on 80% or better, would pass at any vulnerability."

 

NG: "Pass. The deciding factor is the vulnerability in this problem, to try for game or not. I think 4H has only 30-40% chance, we are NOT VULNERABLE, so I pass. At

Vul, I would try for game. If there is no agreement, short suit game try is

out of picture, so long suit trial bid is on. 3C or 3D? 3D is better,

because if partner has diamond honours (KJ or A), game has a reasonable

chance. If you make a game try and have to decide between two suits, better

to bid your worse suit, because you need more help in that one. "

 

Roland "PASS. Non vulnerable, and partner could not introduce Drury. It's highly unlikely that he can cover three of our six losers. The only reason to bid on (3D help suit trial bid is my choice unless I can bid a Romex 2NT to show short spades) would be the risk of LHO balancing in spades."

 

Luis "Pass: Not vulnerable I don't think I want to invite and I don't think the

opponents are going to balance after all those passes. If you have to ask

me I'm more worried about the opponents competing to 2 spades or 3 spades

than missing a heart game."

 

Sergey "3H - preemptive re-raise (safe enough: strong trumps, favorable vulnerability). " A thoughtful bid.

 

Then there was the members who made a game try… Beto choosing the try in diamonds, and the others, using ♣’s.

 

Beto "3♦. With a singleton, this good trump suit and 14 you should invite at least. If we could show the spade shortness, this would be the best way to do it here. Using BB advanced, i bid the suit that i want some high card support in it. I dont bid 3♣ because partner may think that his singleton club is a bad holding."

 

Justin "3C. A lot of minimum hands make game, specifically those with club and diamond honors and little wastage in spades. Sure we could be going down at the 3 level, but it's worth the risk to try and find a game. If I pass they may even balance and push me to 3H anyways."

 

 

Flytoox "I vote for 3C. Do we play long suit game try or short suit game try? Without specification I will bid naturally. "

 

Reisig "Game looks a bit short..with no Drury bid ..BUT ..I try anyway:)) 3C "

 

Finally, there was henri, who found no reason not to push the pedal to the metal.

 

Ritong " 4♥ i bid game on every non minimum hand with elegant shape. Sometimes it makes, sometimes not, it is the "see-saw" principle an important point is, since I hold 100 honors, i do not expect a double.

Like hand one, there was five signoffs, and five game or game bids…. Argh….At least this time, I agree with pass, so I there is less pain than the last hand.

 

PASS = 100

3♥ = 90

3♣ = 80

3♦ = 70

4♥ = 40

[mike777]

Prefer to keep most of system even by passed hand which means constructive raises still on even by passed hand, no Drury.

 

KJ62

542

K83

652

 

would not be a constructive raise.

 

P=1H

1S=2C

2H=P

[inquiry]

Prefer to keep most of system even by passed hand which means constructive raises still on even by passed hand, no Drury.

 

KJ62

542

K83

652

 

would not be a constructive raise.

 

P=1H

1S=2C

2H=P

Try to keep in mind we are using Bridge Base Advanced for these polls. So what we prefer does not come into the picture. I am sure Ritong was bidding his normal method rather than BBO Advanced for his leap to 4♥ here.

[mike777]

I understand.

 

Could someone please explain what our passed hand raises look like with a few examples? Can this hand bid 1s then 2h in BBO advanced or is 2h forced?

[whereagles]

Well.. as for what is or is not a constructive raise, I would say the following

 

Unpassed hand: normal stuff.

3-6: weak raise, bid via 1NT + 2M

7-10: constructive raise, bid 1M-2M.

11-12: invitational raise, bid via 1NT + 3M.

 

Passed hand: values lower a bit because there is Drury available, and because you should NOT bid above the 2 level to invite (pard can be weaker than 12 hcp).

3-4: too weak. You can risk 2M if you feel lucky. Don't bid 1NT because it's no longer forcing.

5-8: constructive, bid 1M-2M.

9-11: invitational, bid Drury.