where went wrong?

[twcho]

[hv=d=n&v=n&n=saktxht8xdxcajt9x&s=sj98haqxxxdjxxxcq]133|200|Scoring: IMP

W N E S

1D X pass 2H

All pass[/hv]

 

Result: 2H+3

 

Is South's 2H an underbid or North pass conservative?

[mike777]

Very tough hand I only make a few observations that I hope you find helpful.

1) If you assume partner has longish hearts then

2) having AK of spades and A of club is a plus outside of trump suit. If you assume partner has longish hearts then having the same honors in hearts is a negative.

3) having ruffing values in D and txx in hearts becomes a plus.

4) With all that said this is a hard hand.

[P_Marlowe]

2H by South is certainly not an underbid,

the dbl could have been made on a weaker

hand.

2H is ok, but the bid is hand on the lower

end of the required strength.

Taking this into account, North could raise,

selling his hand as +15, but having only 3

card support, pass is reasonable.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[HeartA]

2H by South is certainly not an underbid,

the dbl could have been made on a weaker

hand.

2H is ok, but the bid is hand on the lower

end of the required strength.

Taking this into account, North could raise,

selling his hand as +15, but having only 3

card support, pass is reasonable.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

Agree with Marlowe

[coyot]

This hand could take 3♥ from north. Diamond void in the short trump hand indicates that it would even be possible to make 4♥ on Moysian fit. The club suit looks pretty nice and has two side entries that would be available even after drawing trump.

 

South cannot IMHO bid more than 2♥ - outside hearts, the values are scatterred and of doubtful usefulness. After hearing 3♥, no doubt about accepting, though.

[whereagles]

I'm sorry, but I think it's just plain nuts to ask North to bid 3♥ on a min hand with lousy fit, especially opposite what might be a 8-9 hcp with ♥Kxxx for a suit.

 

That being said, South has an obvious 3♥ bid (which shows 5 cards), if not 4 outright.

 

If you want a 'technical' explanation for bidding 3♥, you can use Lawrence's SST & WP evaluation, which hints at an expected 10 or 11(!!) tricks. Heck.. now that I see it, you should just bid 4♥.. lol.

[Finch]

Maybe this is related to what a take-out double shows.

I also think South has a fairly clear 3H call over the double.

I don't believe North is close to a move over 2H.

[twcho]

Actually is there any standard meaning for:

2H, 3H, 4H, 2D and 3D by south?

[joker_gib]

I also would have bid 3♥ with the south's hand

 

Alain

[inquiry]

Actually is there any standard meaning for:

2H, 3H, 4H, 2D and 3D by south?

I use Glenn Ashton's published methods for responding to takeout doubles as published as part of his excellent ETM victory bidding system. This involves bidding only 1♥ with 0 to 10 hcp and a four card suit, and saving jump to 2♥ to show FIVE card suit and 7 to 10 hcp (can include 5 and 6 hcp with KQxxx in the suit).

 

Thus 2♥ would show this hand so no concern raising with Txx as you will not catch Kxxx or Qxxx or Jxxx opposite. In fact, i suspect my auction would be

 

1♦-x-p-2♥

ps-4♥

 

but even if I only raise to 3♥ with north, south has easy 4♥ rebid then.

[hotShot]

Result: 2H+3

 

Is South's 2H an underbid or North pass conservative?

South bid is not an underbid and North does not need to bid further. It is pure luck that this time 11 tricks are on. There is no point in bidding game with any combined 21HCP.

 

But there are indications.......

South knows that both North and East must be short in ♦. So almost all of his points are working, there is no need to downgrade the Q♣. The problem is, that without agreement it is not clear if 2♥ shows 4 (more likely) or 5 cards. So 3♥ is an overbid, but only a slight one. If North X guarantees 3cards in ♥, it can be made.

 

North sang his song by dbling. There is no extra strength or information he can give.

[whereagles]

Actually is there any standard meaning for:

2H, 3H, 4H, 2D and 3D by south?

In French style:

 

2♥ = 8-10 hcp & 4 cards OR 5-7 hcp & 5 cards

3♥ = 8-10 hcp & 5 cards OR 5-7 hcp & 6 cards (the case of this hand)

4♥ = 11+ hcp & 5 cards OR 8-10 hcp & 6 cards

2♦ = 8+ hcp, 4 cards in a major

3♦ = no meaning

[calg]

Assume N-S were playing natural system, they do not have additional tool. South's 2H bid was slightly underbid. As some post mentioned above, 2H+3 was because of lucky distribution. North could easily have 2 Diamonds that could be 2 losers in only one suit. However, North's hand is great value, passing 2H was too conservative. Singleton Diamond, top cards in Spades, and good Club suit are suitable for a 3H raise. Even it could be 4-3 fit, I can not see many loser tricks from North's hand.

[Guest Jlall]

I would just bid 4H over the X. I think north has nothing resembling a bid over 2H, he has 3 small trumps and minimum high cards.

 

As for the comment "there is no point bidding game with a combined 21 HCP" there is more to bridge than high cards. Like fits and shortness and controls. If you've never bid a 21 HCP game, you're missing a lot of games.

[Finch]

For Justin and me (and others) that North hand is a fairly minimum take-out double in support of hearts, and South could easily have only 4 hearts for the 2H bid.

 

If you think it's right to double a 1D opening on various random balanced hands (I can't think of an example right now, but something like Kxxx KQx xxx Axx would get votes elsewhere on BBO) then 2H from South is a serious call and North has a great deal extra.

[Al_U_Card]

Is south able to bid 2D before showing his H? I think not, but 3H is certainly reasonable. The CQ is nice and will likely allow for D pitches from hand. The S are golden and will finesse S values out of opener's hand. I think that South underbid as 2H can be bid on much less.

[Al_U_Card]

Actually is there any standard meaning for:

2H, 3H, 4H, 2D and 3D by south?

2H is 5 with 7-9 hcp or 9-11 with 4

3H is 5+ with 8-11 hcp

2D shows invitational values

3D shows both majors and invitational values

[mikeh]

North has no blame here: he has a minimum takeout double. The black suits render the hand a 'good' minimum, but the ♥ holding is less than partner expects and the stiff ♦ is no more than partner expects for classic minimum takeout double. North has done his job by doubling.

 

I think that South has underbid slightly with 2♥. Yes, 2♥ does show this range of high card: typically 8-10 with 4-5 trump. But this is not a 10 point hand... except to the Walter the Walruses amongst us. The Jxxx of ♦ warrants an upgrade, because we have no wastage, and we can turn some of those x's into winners by ruffing them in dummy.... note that we are speaking in terms of S's expectation on the auction, not asserting that on ALL hands this will happen: sometimes the ♦ are 5422 and East will be overruffing if we don't pull trump in time. But on average, this Jxxx is a good holding on the auction.

 

The black suit holdings are promising as well. Usually J98 is not great: but here we should be expecting a decent 4 card holding in dummy with any finesse likely, tho not assured, to work. Imagine AQ10x in dummy: absent any enemy bidding, this would be a 50% chance of 4 tricks. Once LHO opens and RHO passes, it is probably around a 75-80% chance of 4 tricks.

 

And the stiff ♣Q works as well.

 

So I think the S hand should be upgraded significantly.

 

Does this mean that S should bid 3♥?

 

Not for me. In my preferred scheme (and I believe that this scheme was and maybe still is at least a variant of 'standard') the jump to 3♥ is semi-preemptive: a long, usually weak suit in a weak hand: xxx QJxxxxx xx x would be a hand on which I would bid 3♥.

 

My scheme:

 

1♥ 0-8 with 4-5♥... could be 6♥ with a truly weak hand

2♥ 8-10 with 4+♥, constructive

3♥ see above

4♥ very rare: sort of the same as 3♥ but the suit or the hand is slightly better: I do not believe in preempting partner in constructive auctions.

 

All good hands, of genuine invitational or power game force values, start with the cue bid which is forcing until suit agreement or game.

 

Thus for me this S hand is worth an invitation and I would bid 2♦. This would, it turns out, get us to game more or less by accident.

 

BTW, while everyone so far agrees with double by North, I don't think that 2♣ is hideous, intending to bid 2♠ if convenient. If partner transfered to 2♥ (in my methods) or simply bid 2♥, north raises to game in ♥: on such a sequence, the north hand will have grown up considerably.

[joshs]

I really don't think anything went wrong. South might have bid more than 2H on that hand (he has good shape and only 1 point wasted in diamonds) but 2H is pretty normal (thats all I would bid). North can't bid over 2H with that hand. Quite frankly, would you be suprised to lose 3 trump tricks a diamond and a spade on those 2 hands here? I think you had a normal auction to a normal spot and it happens to make a lot of tricks. I would expect a push....

 

The other day I held ATxxx Axx xx xxx

LHO opens 1H, partner bids 1S, RHO bids 2H, I bid 4S, LHO x's and we made 4S-x on our 18 high. As they were leaving the table, one of them said something like "you guys are too lucky, you need to learn how to bid, imagine bidding game on only 18 high." As he walked away, a walrus mustache seemed to appear....

[Al_U_Card]

Does this mean that S should bid 3♥?

 

Not for me. In my preferred scheme (and I believe that this scheme was and maybe still is at least a variant of 'standard') the jump to 3♥ is semi-preemptive: a long, usually weak suit in a weak hand: xxx QJxxxxx xx x would be a hand on which I would bid 3♥.

I agree that your method is what I expect modern expert standard to be. Undiscussed, I think the gentleman would get into less trouble with the more old-fashione recipe...

[Finch]

The very first argument I got into on BBO forums was over the meaning of a double jump in response to a t/o double....

 

I'm not going to repeat all of that again, but would make one point. As I'm sure Mike is aware, if you cue bid on a genuine invite, you end up forcing to game without a fit, and inviting with a fit unless you also play some conventional methods as the doubler.

 

Take this hand:

1D x P 2D

P ?

 

In normal methods, the doubler would bid 2H here with 4 of them, and 2S with 4 of them and not 4 hearts. So if partner has 4-card support, we can raise to 3H which is not forcing; but if he bids 2S we have to bid 3H to show a genuine heart invite which is forcing ('forcing to suit agreement').

 

So playing this method you have to modify the rest of standard approach somehow: either a new suit by advancer is non-forcing (but then your true game forces are in trouble), or doubler makes 'paradox' rebids (2H = I don't have a heart suit, I might have spades; 2S = I have hearts, I don't have spades etc).

[Al_U_Card]

The very first argument I got into on BBO forums was over the meaning of a double jump in response to a t/o double....

 

I'm not going to repeat all of that again, but would make one point. As I'm sure Mike is aware, if you cue bid on a genuine invite, you end up forcing to game without a fit, and inviting with a fit unless you also play some conventional methods as the doubler.

 

Take this hand:

1D x P 2D

P  ?

 

In normal methods, the doubler would bid 2H here with 4 of them, and 2S with 4 of them and not 4 hearts. So if partner has 4-card support, we can raise to 3H which is not forcing; but if he bids 2S we have to bid 3H to show a genuine heart invite which is forcing ('forcing to suit agreement').

 

So playing this method you have to modify the rest of standard approach somehow: either a new suit by advancer is non-forcing (but then your true game forces are in trouble), or doubler makes 'paradox' rebids (2H = I don't have a heart suit, I might have spades; 2S = I have hearts, I don't have spades etc).

Isn't that why the 3H bid was the "in between" one in old fashioned standard? To clarify the "real" invite from the problematical one. (Also, the "pre-emptive" type would have been bid by passing and coming in with a balancing bid showing much less strength but more length.)

[Guest Jlall]

To me 3H is an invite based on distribution rather than high cards. x Kxxxx Axxxx xx comes to mind. It asks partner to evaluate his trumps, controls, and source of tricks. The actual hand is good on the controls front, bad on the trumps front. I would consider it close but would pass 3H. Anyways, this doesn't fit the bill for a 3H bid for me.

[mike777]

The Complete Book on Takeout Doubles. Michael Lawrence 1994

1) jump to 2h can be only 4H and a good 8-11 points over one of a minor.

2) a cue bid is often forcing to game but may only be an invite. A rebid of a new suit or nt is forcing to game, a raise of partner's suit is an invite.

3) over a takeout of 1s, then 3h would show a good 9-11. Can be only 4 card suit.

4) interestingly I cannot find an example of what a jump to 4h or 3h over takeout of a minor is. :).

[mikeh]

As I'm sure Mike is aware, if you cue bid on a genuine invite, you end up forcing to game without a fit, and inviting with a fit unless you also play some conventional methods as the doubler.

 

I agree wholeheartedly (no pun intended): this is a glaring weakness in the cue forces to suit agreement approach. Nevertheless this is the approach espoused (I believe) by the Bridge World, as part of its consensus 'expert' system known as Bridge World Standard.

 

While this has been a niggling worry since I first adopted the method, funnily enough, it has never caused a problem. Maybe that is because I am too conservative in my hand evaluations :)

 

As it is, the problem hands would seem exactly right for this to be an problem: a minimum double with inadequate ♥ support and an aggressive upgrade by South to cue: and look what happens: the NS hands end up in a decent game more or less (as I originally posted) by accident.

 

If this tells us anything, it seems to be that the S hand is actually worth a game force opposite most classic takeout doubles: consider N with a textbook Axxx KJxx x Axxx: so long as he has the ♠10, this is a good game. So maybe I really am underbidding the S hand!