Run or not?

[toothbrush]

[hv=d=e&v=e&s=sxhkxxdxxckqjt9xx]133|100|Scoring: MP[/hv]

 

(3♠)-4♣-(4♠)-5♣

(5♠)-p-(p)-dbl

(p)-?

 

We had no specific agreements on bidding over preempts, so 4♣ just shows a good hand with good clubs.

[Free]

I'd bid 5NT, let partner choose between 6♣ or 5NT if he has some stoppers.

 

My hand isn't worth anything in defense (except for ♥K perhaps, in front of the stronger hand), so I won't let 5♠* stand.

[pclayton]

Yikes.

 

If the vulnerability were reversed, I'd be worried about them making 5♠ and 6♣ x'd might be cheaper. Here, it seems my options are +100 / -650 in 5♠ and -200 / -500 / -800 in 6♣.

 

Pard couldn't make a stronger move over 4♠ (didn't we agree that pass is forcing over 4♠?). What makes us think we can wrap 12 tricks on this hand?

 

So I pass.

[whereagles]

6♣. Maybe 5♠ goes down, but I doubt it. In any case 6♣ should be cheapo.

[Guest Jlall]

Sorry but I don't understand pulling at any vulnerability.

 

First, my 4C bid was an atrocity and that is why people are feeling the urge to pull right now. I am so light and have no defense and am overcalling at the 4 level! Since I would open with a preempt, this hand is not a 4C bid.

 

Anyways, partner bid 5C. At the time we didn't know if this was to make or a save. That's why we passed 5S and didnt save immediately. He then Xed 5S to say he bid 5C to make. NOW we are going to save after partner has Xed? This seem backwards to me. If partner did not X that would probably mean we should have saved. So why not bid 6C over 5S if you want to bid it now? To pull here would not be consistent, and would tell partner that partnership bridge doesn't exist. If I had bid this way to this point I would always pass.

[mikeh]

I agree with Justin, almost word for word.

 

4♣ was a silly bid.

 

BTW, there is absolutely no sense in playing that 4♣ created a force over 4♠. That approach is unplayable against anyone who has any idea of how to play the game.

 

Having made my very bad 4♣ bid, I must tough it out. Clearly, partner bid 5♣ to make, so there is a good chance of 3 tricks.

 

Further BTW, if I played in a game in which partner overcalled 4♣ and then pulled, that would be the last game I played with that partner (unless I was getting paid :) ). That is how bad I believe the pull to be.

[P_Marlowe]

Pass.

 

If you do not believe, you have what it takes

to bid 4C, you should have passed 3S.

 

Marlowe

[Kalvan14]

4♣ was not a good bid: the rule that there is no pre-empt over a pre-empt would have excluded 5♣ too.

Since you choose to bid 4♣ in the direct seat, now the only thing you can do is pass.

[Fluffy]

I wouldn't had bid 4♣ (IMO 4♣ sows about 2 Kings more). Now I have to be afraid of partner expecting better hand from my previous bid. I woudl just be consequent and pass.

[toothbrush]

[hv=d=e&v=e&n=skhqjxxxdqxxxcaxx&s=sxhkxxdxxckqjt9xx]133|200|Scoring: MP[/hv]

 

(3♠)-4♣-(4♠)-5♣

(5♠)-p-(p)-dbl

(p)-6♣-(dbl)-p

(p)-p

 

This is what my partner had. West lead ♠ for his partners A, switch ♥x for partners A and small ♥ back where East drops a ♠!!!! Can you believe it, East had a singleton ♥ and a void ♣.

Because of this misdefence I went only 1 down (should be -3) for 100 and a top because many E-W pairs bid and made 6♠.

 

While East was thinking about his opening bid, I was planning to preempt with 5♣ when East would have opened something normal. After the 'surprise'-3♠ I still wanted to show my good ♣ because I thought that they had something to make in ♠ but I agree that 4♣ is an overbid. Imo easts bid of 5♠ is very silly. When someone preempts, he's supposed to leave all decisions to his partner and pass all the way. When partner doubled 5♠ I supposed that he was hoping for at least 1 trick from me but I had none (or may be ♥K), that's why I bid 6♣ after 5♠.

 

I may have been lucky, but I think there are enough reasons for me to bid after my partners dbl.

[mikeh]

This post is interesting in that it says something about why we post hands. Toothbrush, the consensus of the posts seems clear: the 4♣ overcall was bad and so was the pull to 6♣. However, you got lucky (in part because it sounds as if East held a freak that should not be opened 3♠), and are now defending your lucky result on the basis of 'good reasons'.

 

This is human nature: we like to take credit for lucky results and we do not like to accept the opinions of others when it indicates that we may have made one (or, in this case, two) mistakes. I have been and will almost certainly in the future be guilty of the same behaviour, so I am not singling you out. This is far from the first thread that exhibited this approach, nor will it be the last.

 

On this hand, with the actual layout, your overcall worked and so did your pull. (Actually, your overcall did not work out, since it induced partner to double, but your pull worked). It is hard to ignore the actual result, but becoming a good player means understanding that bridge is a game of percentages.

 

You could decide to open every hand 7N. Once in a while, you will reach a making contract that almost no one else could reach. In the meantime, you will set a record for horrible results and rapidly run out of partners. Overcalling 4♣ and then pulling the double is not as silly as that, of course, but in the view of the majority of posters, it was poor bridge. The fact that it generated a great result does not change that.

 

What I think you should take from the hand is a realization that you got lucky. Experts rely on percentages, not luck. After all, your partner could very easily have held a better defensive hand and you could have turned a good board into a very bad one.

[HeartA]

I agree with Justin, almost word for word.

 

4♣ was a silly bid.

 

BTW, there is absolutely no sense in playing that 4♣ created a force over 4♠. That approach is unplayable against anyone who has any idea of how to play the game.

 

Having made my very bad 4♣ bid, I must tough it out. Clearly, partner bid 5♣ to make, so there is a good chance of 3 tricks.

 

Further BTW, if I played in a game in which partner overcalled 4♣ and then pulled, that would be the last game I played with that partner (unless I was getting paid :rolleyes: ). That is how bad I believe the pull to be.

I agree with Justin, too.

[Al_U_Card]

The only question on this hand is what to bid after partner balances with a double after 3S-p-p...... The rest of the auction including the 4C bid is a series of guesses and errors......as Mike and Justin say so clearly, bid your hand and the following calls will be much easier to deal with.

[adhoc3]

Anyone will bid 3NT after 3S? ;)

[Elianna]

[hv=d=e&v=e&n=skhqjxxxdqxxxcaxx&s=sxhkxxdxxckqjt9xx]133|200|Scoring: MP[/hv]

 

(3♠)-4♣-(4♠)-5♣

(5♠)-p-(p)-dbl

(p)-6♣-(dbl)-p

(p)-p

 

This is what my partner had. West lead ♠ for his partners A, switch ♥x for partners A and small ♥ back where East drops a ♠!!!! Can you believe it, East had a singleton ♥ and a void ♣.

Because of this misdefence I went only 1 down (should be -3) for 100 and a top because many E-W pairs bid and made 6♠.

 

While East was thinking about his opening bid, I was planning to preempt with 5♣ when East would have opened something normal. After the 'surprise'-3♠ I still wanted to show my good ♣ because I thought that they had something to make in ♠ but I agree that 4♣ is an overbid. Imo easts bid of 5♠ is very silly. When someone preempts, he's supposed to leave all decisions to his partner and pass all the way. When partner doubled 5♠ I supposed that he was hoping for at least 1 trick from me but I had none (or may be ♥K), that's why I bid 6♣ after 5♠.

 

I may have been lucky, but I think there are enough reasons for me to bid after my partners dbl.

Well, if you're just looking at results then 6♣ was awful, it lets the opponents bid a making 6♠! (since 5♠x+6 < 6♠).

 

Now, if your opponents didn't figure it out, you got lucky in another way!

[Bon_An]

I don't think I know whether 5!S dbl will be down,but I think my PD knows more than I.

[toothbrush]

Thanks for all the replies, I really learned a lot about it. I didn't realize that my bid of 4♣ was that bad, but I have to agree... :unsure: The 6♣ bid was a bit of a lucky guess.

I think it may have been a good example how you learn to play bad bridge against players of low level.

[Elianna]

The 6♣ bid was a bit of a lucky guess.

My point is that 6♣ was a very UNLUCKY guess, and your only luck was that the opponents didn't bid 6♠. What I mean is, you were still beating everyone by defending 5♠x+1, so giving them the opportunity to bid again was not a good thing, they just made a wrong choice.