Hand evaluation (1)

[inquiry]

Would 2NT here show a hand that says, "correct to 3♦ with a bad 2♦ bid, and bid 3NT with a good one?"

 

If so, that seems just about right. Seems like 3NT depends upon partners diamonds. Tell him that. The problem with pass, is when partner has KQxxxx of diamonds, at the other tables it goes 1NT then some kind of bid game with diamond fit response.

 

IF you had balanced, no diamond fit, you would pass 2♦. IF you had big balanced with diamond fit, you would bid 3NT.. .so 2NT should carry this meaning I think. I don't see how 3♦ is ever going to get you to 3NT.

[hrothgar]

Agree with Matt's reasoning...

 

Opposite Kxxxxx in Diamonds game is a wonderful proposition

Give partner a "perfect hand like

 

♠ xx

♥ Kxx

♦ KTxxx

♣ xx

 

And game also has great play.

 

However, I'm sure that we can all construct any number of hands where 3N (or even 2N) is an abysmal contract. Unless your response structure is more complicated than you let on - suit quality requirements and the like - you aren't going to be able to achieve perfect results... At the very least: What types of 5332 patterns should be described as holding "Diamonds" rather than "Balanced"?

 

Personally, I lean towards a conservative pass: My Diamond length cuts down the chance that partner holds a six card suit. I don't feel like gambling that partner has a perfect dummy.

 

Equally significant, if I'm playing strong club, I've already decided that I don't care about field protection... I'm not going to second guess myself now.

[mikeh]

3♦

 

Partner will expect me to have Hxx for this bid: yes, I might have xxxx. but he should assume, for the purposes of inviting game, that I have Hxx.

 

In other words, if he holds KQxxxx in ♦ he can make an invitational 3♥ call, getting us to 4♦ if I hold xxxx: after all, he knows that I know that his ♦ are not solid.

 

As for 2N: wonderful, if in your methods it promises a ♦ fit. It would not in my methods. I am somewhat old-fashioned, I guess: I support with support and when I bid something else, I deny a good fit.

 

What would we bid with AKx AQxx xx AJxx?

 

That is, for me, a 2N rebid. Note how little this is worth opposite KQxxxx and out.

 

Those who bid 2N expecting partner to field their Axx♦ support are playing with telepathic partners :(

[joker_gib]

My Diamond length cuts down the chance that partner holds a six card suit.

 

 

Are 9 card fits so rare ? :(

 

I don't feel like gambling that partner has a perfect dummy

 

 

 

If you don't want to gamble, ask him with 3♦ ! B)

[joker_gib]

Those who bid 2N expecting partner to field their Axx♦ support are playing with telepathic partners B)

Totally agree !

 

Well said Mike ! :(

 

Alain

[inquiry]

What would we bid with AKx AQxx xx AJxx?

 

That is, for me, a 2N rebid. Note how little this is worth opposite KQxxxx and out.

 

Those who bid 2N expecting partner to field their Axx♦ support are playing with telepathic partners :D

What would you bid wht that hand? You said it yourself, How much is that hand worth opposite the 2♦ bid? Not much. I would happily pass and play 2♦ with that one. I thnk that was my point exactly.

[whereagles]

Equally significant, if I'm playing strong club, I've already decided that I don't care about field protection... I'm not going to second guess myself now.

Indeed. By playing strong club one is already assuming the system's advantages compensate the eventual problems of field protection.

 

That's the spirit.

[Chamaco]

Equally significant, if I'm playing strong club, I've already decided that I don't care about field protection...  I'm not going to second guess myself now.

Indeed. By playing strong club one is already assuming the system's advantages compensate the eventual problems of field protection.

 

That's the spirit.

Of course, *in general*, but there are indeed borderline cases, no?

 

I mean, I agree I would not make a gross distortion of the hand, to avoid going vs the field, but is a 2NT bid a "gross distortion" here ?

 

I think it's close.

[mikeh]

What would we bid with AKx AQxx xx AJxx?

 

That is, for me, a 2N rebid. Note how little this is worth opposite KQxxxx and out.

 

Those who bid 2N expecting partner to field their Axx♦ support are playing with telepathic partners :D

What would you bid wht that hand? You said it yourself, How much is that hand worth opposite the 2♦ bid? Not much. I would happily pass and play 2♦ with that one. I thnk that was my point exactly.

I did not express myself well. If partner has KQxxxx and out, he can and probably should bid 3♦ over 2N.

 

The conditions of contest specified that partner was showing 5+♦ and 5-7 hcp.

 

He could have many hands on which 3N is playable and many more on which 2N scores better than 2♦.

 

My point was that we should not be deciding which of these hands partner has. We should cooperate by describing our hand and allowing partner to play a role.

 

If he has KJxxx in ♦, 2♦ may be the only contract that we can bid and go down in opp my specified 18 count. While on a good day, opposite a max, 3N may be very playable: picture AKx AQxx xx AJxx opposite xx J10x KJxxx Q10x. I'd rather play 3N than 2♦ at any form of scoring.

 

 

I see an recurrent theme in many postings on this forum: a perceived need to make the final decision when we can, instead, make a descriptive call that affords partner an opportunity to demonstrate why we play with him/her.

 

IMHO, 3♦ does just that. Neither pass nor 2N do.

[Al_U_Card]

IMHO, 3♦ does just that. Neither pass nor 2N do.

I see your point and tend to agree with it. At the table, a 1NT opening might have provoked a xfr to D with a 6 card suit. Do you think that the "max" 7 hcp hand would then find another bid after a "superaccept" by opener?

 

I didn't associate the 3D bid with an invite to NT, (that's what I thought the 2NT bid was under the circumstances) but then I don't play strong club so....

[awm]

This sort of situation is part of why I gave up playing the methods you describe.

 

It always seemed to me that there were very few hands where opener could comfortably pass responder's non-forcing advance. If opener has a decent fit for responder, then one extra card of length in responder's hand often makes game playable (here, give responder KQxxxx of diamonds and nothing else and game is excellent, or even KJxxxx and out and game is okay). If opener has no fit to speak of, then there could easily be a better contract in a different strain. You can surely construct hands that would want to pass, but I don't feel like they are common.

 

This is not going to be a difficult hand for the standard bidders. Their auction will start with 1NT. There are decent odds this is a better partial than diamonds. If responder has six decent diamonds we will see an accepted diamond invite. If responder has six junky diamonds, we will see a diamond signoff.

 

Anyways, I am endplayed by the methods, and will bid 2NT because I can't stand to miss a game opposite six decent diamonds. Opposite five decent diamonds I expect eight tricks in both diamonds and notrump and want the higher scoring matchpoint spot. If partner's diamonds are lousy we may well have lost the board by this action. Since I would accept a "diamond invite" I can't really see passing here.

[adhoc3]

I play precision with my regular pd. The 2♦ here promised decent suit, at least KQJxx or KQTxxx. A pass could be more appropriate with enough hcps but poor suit. In our style the bidding would be:

 

1♣--(1♠)--2♦

2♠*--------3♦ *our immediate cuebid shows fitting or very strong hand. It's not GF.

Pass//

 

2♠-------------2NT*, 3C* *max, feature

3NT

 

Maybe 3♦ or 3NT will -1, we just accept it as cost for the lucky games we catch.

 

2♠ is not an option here.

 

Welcome your comments.

 

Jack

[Robert]

Hello echognome

 

If you are playing take out doubles here that xx Qxx KQxxx xxx

example hand should double. Whatever partner bids, you protect his possible spade holding.

 

I did not study the conditions of contest before I wrote this, so 'if' double would not be takeout, please pretend that I did not 'post' this reply. :)

 

Hello everyone

 

Those posters agreeing that KQJxxx should force to game might be right. :)

 

If partner holds xx in a balanced hand or an unbalanced hand with 'x' or xx in diamonds, this is not going to be a great dummy. :(

 

Maybe some invitational auction would be better? :)

 

Is this bidding an advertisement for 14-16 or 15-17 range 1NTs? Partner could rebid 1NT 'showing' somewhat more than the minimum values shown by a 16-18NT rebid.

 

I know, I know. You open 12+-15HCP so that you can play 1D=4(5)+ Ds

 

I play a 2+ D suit and 1C=16+ unbalanced or 18+ balanced.

 

Whatever methods work for you. Enjoy. :)

 

Many also play that 1NT-2NT- and opener can express or deny interest with the two 3m bids.

 

If you do not play 1NT-2NT as a diamond transfer, substitute whatever method here that you do use.

 

Regards,

Robert

[Robert]

Hello adhoc3

 

What do you bid with KJxxxx diamonds and a side king?

 

At first glance, I like your auction of 1C-(1S)-2D-2S* showing a fit or a

strong hand. :)

 

The people who wanted to use KQJxxx as a game force could now bid two

diamonds and pass a raise to 3D since it would not contain Ax or Axx

 

What exactly do you 'define' as a 'fit' with your 2S cuebid? xxx or xx might not be the 'answer' opposite KQxxxx or KQJxxx or KQJxx or KQxxx

 

Even Qxx or Jxx might not be the 'answer' opposite KQxxxx or KJxxx suits

 

I saw one method where the 3NT invitation was made by either KQxxxx or AQxxxx

where an Ace or King opposite the suit 'plus' quick tricks would make 3NT.

 

What this method bids with AJ10xxx plus a Quack or two, they did not bother to mention.

 

You can bid 3NT with KQxxxx opposite four Aces for a 21HCP 3NT with very good chances playing the method.

 

I suspect that you might want to play 2S*-2NT either asks or tells about a spade stopper. Partner could bid 2S*-2NT*-3C showing a stopper and 2NT*-3D denying a spade stopper.

 

This way you could show your Axx fit and responder could either pass 3Ds 'if' a spades stopper was not present or bid 3NT 'if' the combined holding showed a spade stopper.

 

With two spade stoppers 'known'(when partner claims a stopper and you are also looking at one!)

 

I also feel that the 3C* bid should also be pressed into service to help find out if we have nine tricks in 3NT. If your goal is 5Ds, you have a lot of space to check out those details.

 

1C-(1S)-2D-2S*-2NT-3C might ask for a partial stopper, 3D would show a weak suit and 3NT would show a spade stopper. :) or :( ?

 

Thanks for the idea. It is going into my Big Club system.

 

Regards,

Robert

[Rebound]

My brothers and I play a rather eccentric variant of precision, however, I believe that our meaning of 2♦ is similar enough to the given auction to make it worthwhile commenting here. I agree with mikeh in that my vote went to 3♦ although I would have some sympathy for pass. I believe that if I am going to bid NT, I will just take a shot at 3, and I don't have a good enough feeling about this hand for that.

 

Of course, the usual "I may have no clue what I am talking about" disclaimer applies :-)

[Chamaco]

This sort of situation is part of why I gave up playing the methods you describe.

Adam,

could you elaborate on your preferred methods after opps interference ?

 

I switched to NF Freebids because I HATED to use the 5-7 cardshowing double especially when holding an unbalanced hand.

 

Is there an alternative, more efficient way to handle interference that does not use double with unbalanced hands (transfer responses perhaps? developments? how to handle balanced hands with/without stoppers ?)

[PMetsch]

My point was that we should not be deciding which of these hands partner has. We should cooperate by describing our hand and allowing partner to play a role.

I agree with your point, but there is a big difference between these hands:

 

♠Axx

♥AJxx

♦Axx

♣Axx

 

and

 

♠Axx

♥KQJx

♦Axx

♣KQJ

 

With the first hand I bid 2NT because I probably make the same number of tricks in ♦ and NT (it is MP afterall), with the right hand we make 3NT and the field probably plays NT. I realy like to play NT unless partner has a poor diamond suit.

 

With the second hand I bid 3♦, it is just the opposite. 3NT is not favourite to make unless partner has some spade stopper and I think a ♦ contract produces more tricks than a NT contract.

[whereagles]

is a 2NT bid a "gross distortion" here ?

Of course not. 2NT to shows a balanced or semi-balanced 16-17, which is precisely what you have!

[adhoc3]

Robert,

What do you bid with KJxxxx diamonds and a side king?

2♦, hoping good luck. It's quite marginal, but the side K compensates. AJTxxx is acceptable too but less valued than KQxxxx. We agreed with 2 of AKQ.

What exactly do you 'define' as a 'fit' with your 2S cuebid?

At least Ax, Kx, or Qx. Better bid 3♦ later (if can) with JTx -- purely partscore oriental.

I suspect that you might want to play 2S*-2NT either asks or tells about a spade stopper.....

Right. 2NT confirm stopper, the cuebider dont promise that.

1C-(1S)-2D-2S*-2NT-3C might ask for a partial stopper, 3D would show a weak suit and 3NT would show a spade stopper.  :)  or :(  ?

Never thought about that, sounds good. Maybe it's straight forward between long time partnership?

 

When will your Big Club System to be issued? May I have a copy? :)

 

Jack

[Winstonm]

Without knowing the intricacies of the system, I think the key issue here is to try to get partner to make another move with long, good diamonds all the while not overstating the strength of my hand. IMO, 3D is the way to do this. 3D should be non-forcing but encouraging. I could have passed but didn't. I could have cue bid but didn't. I could have bid NT and didn't. So why pick precisely 3D as a bid? I must be trying to get to something, and 3D isn't a strong enough call to put 5D into play so the only logical contract is 3N. If so, why not bid 2N? Because I need a source of tricks. IMO, if partner has bid 2D on KQxxxx he should bid 3S. He has limited his hand nicely with the 5-7 range, so all he can be showing is a good suit without a stopper.

 

Winston

[Chamaco]

I want to thank all the posters here :)

 

First of all, I am glad the hand was not so straightforward.

 

Secondly, it was interesting to hear the various ideas about the proper requirements of the 2D freebid.

 

Thirdly, equally interesting, the various opinions about how to "make a move" towards 3NT.

 

============

 

At the table my pard passed 2D and I had xx- Kxx- KJxxxx-xx, with diamonds dividing 2-2 ;)

 

But the main idea of the pst was not a "Who's to blame" thing, but rather to make use of this hand to refine the judgment in such situations (we moved only very recently to NFB after the overcalled big club).

 

Thanks again :)

[awm]

My current methods with Sam after interference with our strong club:

 

Non-jump suit bids, notrump bids = natural and game forcing

 

X = takeout; 5+ points unlimited; if minimal maybe a bit off-shape (tend to X with shortage); lebensohl applies to opener's rebid if it will be at the two-level

 

Pass = either a trap pass, or less than GF values and the wrong shape for takeout X

 

Cuebids and jumps = transfers to the next suit; this shows either a semi-positive with a decent 6+ single suit (i.e. KQxxxx and out) or a distributional two-suited semi-positive with game interest opposite a fit (i.e. a 5-5 hand). Generally opener assumes the former, and accepts the transfer with min values and no fit, bids a new suit naturally with no real fit, or cues/bids game with a good fit.

 

While I admit that these too are perhaps "not best" they have served us better than the "5-7" double or the "all game forces double" type approaches.

[Kalvan14]

My vote here is for 2NT: the hand has a good play in 3NT if partner has a decent diamonds suit (and before you ask, 2NT should promise a fit in diamonds). With the given hand, advancer would certainly accept the invitation to 3NT.

 

I believe that pass would be a very shy action, considering the 4 quick tricks (and - strange to say - the opener's hand is not really very strong in defense, even if there are the same 4 tricks).

 

To complete the picture:

• 2S should be either a GF hand with fit in diamonds and unbalanced hand or a balanced hand with diamonds fit but no stopper (or insufficient stopper) in spades. Clearly the latter option is the priority for advancer.
  
• 3D is an unbalanced hand, invitational in diamonds (the GF hand is included in 2S)
  

[Finch]

But the main idea of the pst was not a "Who's to blame" thing, but rather to make use of this hand to refine the judgment in such situations (we moved only very recently to NFB after the overcalled big club).

We've been playing transfers after an overcall for years, but they (almost) never come up. A couple of weekends ago we had the auction

 

1S - (2H) - 3C ( xfer to diamonds) - (P)

3D - all pass

 

I was asked what strength partner had shown, and I said "constructive-ish, but expecting me to bid 3D unless I have extra values or a fit". I was rather surprised to see dummy hit with

 

K

xxx

K10xxxxx

xx

 

which didn't look very constructive to me.

 

It turns out we'd never really discussed what we meant by "constructive" in this sort of sequence.

 

(Irrelevant on the hand as I had a super-unsuitable 6304 10-count opposite and we lost 2 imps in 3D-3 against 2S-2)