care to comment?

[kenberg]

[hv=d=s&v=n&s=sakqxhkq9xxdxcaxx]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

1H-P-1NT-P

2S-P-3C-P

4C-P-P-P

 

 

The hand shown is mine.

 

 

A club is led, I put down the dummy, LHO looks a little surprised.

 

Me: You think I should pass 3C?

 

LHO: yep

 

RHO: Pard, you're crazy. It's probably cold for 5C. Don't listen to my partner.

 

Perhaps I should mention we all know each other, this is match seven in a Sunday Swiss, neither team is in contention. You might say the usual rules of decorum have been relaxed a bit.

 

Anyway, partner calls for a low club, LHO produces the king and another club, the ace of hearts is wrong, and partner goes down.

 

Partner is either 2-1-5-5 or 1-2-5-5 (think of this as two separate problems if it matters) and so the question arises, who was supposed to do what. After the hand, RHO (who approved of my raise to 4) suggested pard could have bid 2NT passable after 2S and I could bid 3C passable. Maybe so, it would have been right in this case.

 

I should probably say that although the 1NT was forcing, a bid of 2C over 1H would not have been game forcing. So partner's hand is fairly limited. On the other hand, it seems that KQxxxx would give him a play for 5C (six club tricks, three spades, one ruff and one heart) and if, by chance, he had KQxxxx and the Jack of hearts it should be an easy play for eleven tricks (no I am not bidding on the assumption partner has the heart Jack, only on the assumption there could well be a decent play for game opposite a modest holding).

 

As it happens, there were two auctions Sunday that began 1H-1NT-2S and neither of them worked out well for us. It seems to me that a Lebensohl 2NT is not practical over this particular reverse (better if, as RHO suggests, I am allowed to pass 2NT and then at least 3m would show where my 3 card holding is), but I seek the advice of wise counsel.

 

Ken

[Guest Jlall]

I like leb here, otherwise it's impossible to sort out forcing and non forcing bids. Regardless of whether 3C was forcing or not, you have an ideal 4C bid. You described your shape and strength.

[junyi_zhu]

I like leb here, otherwise it's impossible to sort out forcing and non forcing bids. Regardless of whether 3C was forcing or not, you have an ideal 4C bid. You described your shape and strength.

yeah, even if 3C is nonforcing, 4C is still right, you only need C KQxxxx to have a reasonable play in 5C.

[mike777]

Structured reverses 3c=game force.

 

So then 4d can be ace ask now.

 

Even if playing with p/u I would chance 4d splinter over 3clubs undiscussed.

[mikeh]

I have no idea why partner should be 5-5 in the minors: maybe I misunderstood your post.

 

I also believe that lebensohl is a great device here. It allows you to get out in 3 minor unless opener has great shape: he bids 3♣ unless he cannot stand the thought of you passing 3♣.

 

If you play leb, then of course 3♣ is forcing.

 

If you do not play leb, then you have to have an agreement as to whether 3♣ is forcing, and you would need to pay me a lot of money (or threaten me with a big gun) to get me to play it as non-forcing.

 

With the actual hand, I am far, far closer to a splinter than I am to a pass.

 

How would he bid with xx xx Axx KQxxxx? How are you getting to 6♣ if he thinks that you should pass 3♣ with your hand? (don't tell me he would/should bid 4♣: then you miss 3N too many times: AQxx AKJ10x KQx x is a good hand for him to hold over 4♣ ;) )

[Guest Jlall]

Just had a thought, maybe transfers are best in this auction?

 

2N=clubs

3C=diamonds

3D=2-3 hearts signoff, or 2 hearts with a 3N bid (planning on bidding 3N next) or a 3 card limit raise hand type.

3H=spade raise, probably a hand like AKx x Jxxxx xxxx

3S=minors

 

There are a lot of advantages to this method it seems, I kinda like it.

[junyi_zhu]

Just had a thought, maybe transfers are best in this auction?

 

2N=clubs

3C=diamonds

3D=2-3 hearts signoff, or 2 hearts with a 3N bid (planning on bidding 3N next) or a 3 card limit raise hand type.

3H=spade raise, probably a hand like AKx x Jxxxx xxxx

3S=minors

 

There are a lot of advantages to this method it seems, I kinda like it.

One problem is that you sometimes want to wait for opener to show his shape:

for example: you hold SKx HQx DAJxxx Cxxxx, you probably like to bid 2NT, and if opener can bid 3C you'd just bid 3NT, if partner can bid 3D, you want to raise it, if

partner bids 3H, you want to raise it as well. In the transfer structure, you have to show your doubleton hearts prematurally. And poor opener doesn't know what to do with:

SAQxx HAKxxx DKQx Cx, you diamond fit may get buried. So an improvement is that you want to transfer to any reasonable 5 card minor suits. That probably solves the problem:

so you transfer to 3D, and over partner super accept, 4D, you can go for the slam.

And if partner can only bid 3D, you can now support 3H. So direct 3D(to 3H) probably shows something like 3-2-4-4 shape or with bad 5 card minor suit. This is clearly a good structure. Especially good over 1H 1N 2S, because responder doesn't have a lot of different hand types to show.

[kenberg]

Mikeh: When posting I was concentrating more on my options than on partner's. I agree he cannot be 5-5. He was, but it's not possible. I would pass 3C (I took it as non-forcing) holding three diamonds, expecting us to be playing a 6-1 fit.

 

Jason's suggestion of transfers coupled with 3S as showing both minors has promise, the main difficulty being that it would not come up that often and the result of forgetting would be pretty severe. Also 4S in a Moysian may be the only makeable game, but one perhaps could work out how to get there. (Edit: Yep, that's included. Sorry about the casual reading.) Of course it would get us to 4C dn 1 on the current hand, but that seems fair enough. 4C had a play and in fact would make, as the cards lay, if partner had put up the ace at trick 1 since he can then still get his ruff (Kx of clubs and the ace of hearts to his right). (Pard worked this through later. I seldom look over my partner's play.)

 

I think this hand does show a problem with Lebensohl. Suppose pard bids 2N and I, as asked, bid 3C. Maybe I should/would not do this holding four diamonds but surely I would with three diamonds and one club, would I not? Partner has not asked me to be clever or clairvoyant, he has asked me to bid 3C.

 

On the way home we pretty much agreed that we need to think over our reverses a bit, hence this post. So I am not rejecting any suggestions, but I do want to look them over carefully.

Edited October 3, 2005 by kenberg

[Guest Jlall]

for example: you hold SKx HQx DAJxxx Cxxxx, you probably like to bid 2NT, and if opener can bid 3C you'd just bid 3NT, if partner can bid 3D, you want to raise it, if

partner bids 3H, you want to raise it as well.  In the transfer structure, you have to show your doubleton hearts prematurally. And poor opener doesn't know what to do with:

SAQxx HAKxxx DKQx Cx, you diamond fit may get buried.

I don't agree. You can describe this hand well by starting with a transfer (3C) and then bidding 3H over 3D, or raising a 3H bid, or passing a 3N bid. If partner had the hand you gave him he would bid 4D over 3C and you could easily drive to slam.

[junyi_zhu]

for example: you hold SKx HQx DAJxxx Cxxxx, you probably like to bid 2NT, and if opener can bid 3C you'd just bid 3NT, if partner can bid 3D, you want to raise it, if

partner bids 3H, you want to raise it as well.  In the transfer structure, you have to show your doubleton hearts prematurally. And poor opener doesn't know what to do with:

SAQxx HAKxxx DKQx Cx, you diamond fit may get buried.

I don't agree. You can describe this hand well by starting with a transfer (3C) and then bidding 3H over 3D, or raising a 3H bid, or passing a 3N bid. If partner had the hand you gave him he would bid 4D over 3C and you could easily drive to slam.

dude, that's just the solution I provided below. So transfer bids guarantee at least 5 cards. I first thought it shows 6, then I realzied that it should only show 5 or more.

[han]

I like the transfers too, let's call them Jason-transfers!

 

Playing lebensohl I would bid 3D over 2NT holding 4-5-3-1 shape, not 3C. This might work out badly on some hands but I prefer to play that 3C shows tolerance (so 2+). Showing 4-5-3-1 shape should work out best most often.

[inquiry]

I like the transfers too, let's call them Jason-transfers!

 

Playing lebensohl I would bid 3D over 2NT holding 4-5-3-1 shape, not 3C. This might work out badly on some hands but I prefer to play that 3C shows tolerance (so 2+). Showing 4-5-3-1 shape should work out best most often.

This seems backwards to me....

 

With strong 4513 hands (really good reverse rather than some whimpy one), over 2NT, I think you should bid 3♦. If partner has a lot of diamonds and a misfit, ok, let him (well you) play 3♦. If he has ♣, you have forced the biddign to the 4-level. This is called a paradox bid. The hand in this thread would be a paradox bid over 2NT... While with 4531 hands, I would very tamely bid 3♣ over 2NT.

 

For more about pardox bids, look up Chris Ryall and paradox with goggle.

[whereagles]

Kenberg, you bid it perfectly.