0% of the matchpoints

[mr1303]

[hv=d=s&v=n&n=sakqxxxhjxdxckxxx&s=sxxhqdkxxxcajt9xx]133|200|Scoring: MP[/hv]

 

Our bidding went:

 

1♣ (1♥) 1♠ (Pass)

2♣ (Pass) 4♦ (Pass)

5♣ All pass

 

I made 12 tricks for +420. Of course the traveller had a set of +450s and +480s on it.

 

Who is more to blame?

 

Note: 2♠ over 1♥ would be a weak jump shift, and 3♦ over 2♣ would be 5-5 shape and game forcing.

[whereagles]

4♦ seems like a precipitation to me. After 4♦, South is pretty much obliged to bid 5♣. Better to bid 2♦ instead of 4. That should be forcing, no?

[helene_t]

Over 2♣, North should bid either 3♠ (assuming it's forcing) or 2♥.

[inquiry]

North 100%... this is matchpoints after all. With those spades, you can not give up on 4♠ so easily. After 4♦ how are you ever going to get back into spades.

[joker_gib]

North 100%... this is matchpoints after all. With those spades, you can not give up on 4♠ so easily. After 4♦ how are you ever going to get back into spades.

Agree :

 

Bidding should go something like :

 

1♣ (1♥) 1♠ (Pass)

2♣ (Pass) 2♥ (Pass)

3♦ (Pass) 3♠ (Pass)

4♠

 

Alain

[SoTired]

Both. South for opening a lite 1C and North for 4D. 4D does not do justice for the power of North's hand. North needs only the 2 rounded aces from South to bid 6C.

 

I might rebid 4C from North to set trump and elicit a q-bid from south.

 

If South opens 3C, North has an obvious 4S bid.

 

If South passes, North-South have little problem getting to 4S

[MickyB]

South gets the blame for opening that pile, despite North's later guess to subside in game. Btw, what was your NT range? If it was weak, then opening that changes from a committable offence to a hanging offence.

 

Shouldn't 3♦ be the splinter here? Not that you'll find 4♠ still unless you have very firm agreements.

[pbleighton]

I agree that North is to blame, but if he plays 3S as NF, he has a problem. 2D should be natural, and 2H (I think) should be limit plus in support of clubs.

 

I probably would have bid 2D, then jumped in spades.

 

Peter

[han]

I agree that North is to blame, but if he plays 3S as NF, he has a problem. 2D should be natural, and 2H (I think) should be limit plus in support of clubs.

It should definitely not.

[hotShot]

North has to find a way to tell about his ♠ at MP's (well also at IMP's).

These has to be a systemic whay to show a "strong" hand with a 6M suit.

1♣ - 1♠

2♣ - 3♠

Might be a way to start in your system.

[pclayton]

I wouldn't open the South hand but it has nothing to do with the result.

 

North is practicing for IMPs with the 4♦ call. The partnership cannot recover from this bid.

[bid_em_up]

I wouldn't open the South hand but it has nothing to do with the result.

<sarcasm on>

 

But, but, but.....It qualifies for Rule of 20!!

 

</sarcasm off>

 

:)

[inquiry]

I wouldn't open the South hand but it has nothing to do with the result.

<sarcasm on>

 

But, but, but.....It qualifies for Rule of 20!!

 

</sarcasm off>

 

:)

No need for sarcasm here..

 

South has

xx

Q

Kxxx

AJTxxx

 

Let's throw away the queen and make it

 

xx

x

Kxxx

AJTxxx

 

By ZAR, that is;

 

 7 HCP

 3 Control Points

15 distributional Points

----------

25 Zar points,

 

Not an opening bid. Add the heart queen back, and decide if singleton queen is enough to change you mind and open. I wouldn't open but I think it is ok to do so. As for rule of 20, many have gone to Rule of 19, and I heard arguements for rule of 18.

 

But the problem isn't south. The problem is North... the question if south is an opener or not is a red herring.

[bid_em_up]

But the problem isn't south. The problem is North... the question if south is an opener or not is a red herring.

Let me ask you a few questions as well as provide my own thoughts.

 

Why is it a red herring? The original poster asked who was more to blame. I think by opening this hand the normal auction to 4♠ gets fouled. He didnt state it specifically, but if I had to bet, he could go and check the boards and would find that none of the pairs playing spades got a 1♣ opener in front of them.

 

How much simpler would the auction be if South passes? Opening this hand 1♣ simply screws the auction up as it usually will. I would much rather see this hand opened 3♣ if it absolutely must be opened. At least that would be a somewhat accurate description of its values and defensive potential.

 

Why should they end in 4♠ anyway? North certainly has every right to expect that 6C is a great contract, regardless of the form of scoring. 10 card fit, solid 6 card side suit, 4 trumps, 2nd round control in diamonds. All he really needs is the heart Ace and voila!!! 6♣. Both red aces and the club Ace? Hot diggity dawg!! 7♣!! Heck, partner did open, its not too unreasonable to expect something like this x Axx Axx A10xxxx, now is it?

 

On second thought, scratch that last question, from someone who espouses ZAR openings, I suppose it would be too much to expect. :)

 

What do you hope to accomplish or gain when you open this hand 1♣? You have no major, heck, you dont even have SUPPORT for a major!! You aren't going to be happy when it goes 1♣ (2♥) X p. You wont be all that thrilled at having to bid 2♣ after 1C-1♥/1♠, will you? I can see absolutely no purpose for opening this piece of trash hand. Unless of course, you just like to hear yourself bid and pass simply isnt a part of your vocabulary.

 

Sorry, but I think overall, the end result is directly caused by the opening bid. And not because of Norths subsequent bidding, although I will agree that he could do better as well.

[mike777]

I open on this piece of swiss cheese all the time, but partner and the opp. need to be in on your opening bids too. Ben said it all as others have, this is MP your only options on this hand are 4s or 6clubs. Let's get a 2h cuebid in there at somepoint to gameforce this puppy.

[jdonn]

As I seem to be doing a lot lately, I will take the unpopular view. I think there is a lot more blame for south than most people seem to. For one thing, yes opening made it difficult. I don't think it's a red herring at all, if what you are saying is the right contract could have been reached anyway that is true, but it would have been reached a lot more easily if south had passed, and this is the sort of thing the people who open light hands seem to consistently ignore. If south hadn't opened then north would never have slam ambitions and it would be very easy to reach 4♠.

 

Given the opening bid, saying north shouldn't splinter seems like resulting to me, to some degree anyway. He has slam opposite xx Ax xxx Axxxxx, and last I checked slam's score well at matchpoints too. If his partner bids 4♥ over the splinter he can all but bid slam. If not, his partner should (as on this hand) have rebid 4♠, just in case that is their game. There are two important principles at work in my mind.

 

- Bids in partner's major on the 4 level should be offers to play whenever that is a possible interpretation, even during what looks like a cuebidding auction.

- Raise your partner's major on 3 when you aren't balanced. That leaves you free to support on later rounds with a doubleton without fearing that you will be misinterpreted.

 

I think south should rebid 4♠ over the 4♦ bid. And I think north has no blame at all. If south has a singleton spade then 5♣ scores the same as 4♠ on the expected 4-2 break, and if spades are 3-3 and you don't have slam that's just too bad.

[pclayton]

Switch my hand to:

 

AJTxxx

Kxxx

Q

xx

 

And I will open this (Well, probably ;) <_< ).

 

The reason I hate to open with a minor is that it becomes just too easy for the 8 count on my left to overcall, and the flat 10 count on my right to raise. They have close to 1/2 the deck, and have found their par spot of 110, 140 or -100. WDO's!

 

OTOH. if I pass, pard might fish out a 1♦ or 1♥ opening bid in 3rd seat. RHO passes, I compete, and we probably shut out the opps. We get to play our minor partial, and we are +110. WD Us.

 

Or, the hand just gets passed out, whcih is probably a good result if we have the minors and they have the majors, or its a misfit. :)

[inquiry]

But the problem isn't south. The problem is North... the question if south is an opener or not is a red herring.

Let me ask you a few questions as well as provide my own thoughts.

 

Why is it a red herring?

It is a red herring because at Matchpoint, you simply can NOT take spades out of play. This was not IMPs, where the difference between 4S and 5C and 6S and 6C (if they both make) is rather trivial.

 

 

The original poster asked who was more to blame. I think by opening this hand the normal auction to 4♠ gets fouled. He didnt state it specifically, but if I had to bet, he could go and check the boards and would find that none of the pairs playing spades got a 1♣ opener in front of them.

 

Forget the "normal auction" after pass. The "normal auction" after 1♣ should still find ♠s or at least explore them.

 

((Simpler auction question deleted due to this ending statement)) Second thought, scratch that last question, from someone who espouses ZAR openings, I suppose it would be too much to expect.  <_<

 

Perhaps you mis-read my post, I said I would not open this hand, but I think it could very easily be opened by many.

 

What do you hope to accomplish or gain when you open this hand 1♣?

 

Again, I said I wouldn't open this hand, but what you gain is multiple. First, there is a first mover advantage. Second, you might find a fit for possible save, third, you prefer a ♣ lead if they play notrump (for instance). But since I would not open, I am certainly not going to defend that choice. But open or NOT, the problem was North wasn't thinking Matchpoints when he bid 4D giving up forever on playing in spades.

 

Sorry, but I think overall, the end result is a directly caused by the opening bid. And not because of Norths subsequent bidding, although I will agree that he could do better as well.

 

Well, you lead a very sheltered life if you think that after South opens there is no way to get to spades. Let's look at one possible auction after North opens 1S.. what if NS play invitational jump shifts... so that 1S-3C shows good clubs, two or less spades, and about 10-12 points. This pair would probably have bid....

 

P-1S-3C-4D and ended up in the same trouble. Don't blame the opening bid, blame the thoughtless 4D bid.

[pclayton]

As I seem to be doing a lot lately, I will take the unpopular view. I think there is a lot more blame for south than most people seem to. For one thing, yes opening made it difficult. I don't think it's a red herring at all, if what you are saying is the right contract could have been reached anyway that is true, but it would have been reached a lot more easily if south had passed, and this is the sort of thing the people who open light hands seem to consistently ignore. If south hadn't opened then north would never have slam ambitions and it would be very easy to reach 4♠.

 

Given the opening bid, saying north shouldn't splinter seems like resulting to me, to some degree anyway. He has slam opposite xx Ax xxx Axxxxx, and last I checked slam's score well at matchpoints too. If his partner bids 4♥ over the splinter he can all but bid slam. If not, his partner should (as on this hand) have rebid 4♠, just in case that is their game. There are two important principles at work in my mind.

 

- Bids in partner's major on the 4 level should be offers to play whenever that is a possible interpretation, even during what looks like a cuebidding auction.

- Raise your partner's major on 3 when you aren't balanced. That leaves you free to support on later rounds with a doubleton without fearing that you will be misinterpreted.

 

I think south should rebid 4♠ over the 4♦ bid. And I think north has no blame at all. If south has a singleton spade then 5♣ scores the same as 4♠ on the expected 4-2 break, and if spades are 3-3 and you don't have slam that's just too bad.

North indeed has a tough decision after the opening bid of 1♣. if South specifically has a s/v spade, 6♣ could be very good.

 

But if South has 2 or even 3 spades (still possible), then 6♠ should be as playable as 6♣ and scores better.

 

For North to completely ignore the AKQ-6th on the 2nd round of bidding is a complete distortion.

 

Once again, Han's (ok, and mine <_< ) NSI comes to the rescue. Isn't an auction like:

 

1♣-1♠

2♣-3♠ (GF)

3N (say) - 4♣

 

just a real nice description of the North hand?

[jdonn]

Once again, Han's (ok, and mine  <_< ) NSI comes to the rescue. Isn't an auction like:

 

1♣-1♠

2♣-3♠ (GF)

3N (say) - 4♣

 

just a real nice description of the North hand?

Yes ;) But I try to avoided blaming the methods as long as the ones in use are normal and at least somewhat meritorious.

 

That auction isn't a sure thing either. South will raise to 4♠ and slam will still be missed opposite xx Ax xxx Axxxxx (plus whatever additions make it an opening bid).

 

Well...maybe.

[keylime]

♠ AKQxxx

♥ Jx

♦ x

♣ Kxxx

 

♠ xx

♥ Q

♦ Kxxx

♣ AJT9xx

 

 

South's hand is not an opening. It's not even close to being an opening. It's a hand that comes in with a 2♣ overcall and nothing more.

 

If East-West opens a heart now South's hand comes into view. If West opens I'd treat North's hand as an intermediate jump (I don't use weak jumps) and bid 2♠. South will now bid the game under no pressure.

 

South needs to table this hand.

[kfgauss]

I think south should rebid 4♠ over the 4♦ bid.

I really think this shows at least ♠Hx. I do raise on 3 often, but with 3 card support and a good 6 card minor I'll often choose to rebid the minor (if this is where we differ, then I understand somewhat more, but still disagree with 4♠ on xx).

 

This is for various reasons, including choice of games with 5 reasonable but not great spades (say KQ9xx), as well as being able to better judge slam prospects when partner's hand is better overall.

 

Also, as others have noted, one can/should usually take it slower with 6 decent spades.

 

Andy

[foo]

When a guy who calls himself "bid_em_up" thinks someone made a mistake in opening a hand...

 

...they most likely did.

S gets the 1st blame.

 

N gets the 2nd blame for bidding AKQxxx of S's in a GF hand the same way he would bid xxxx of S's in a min hand. Ick.

[EricK]

Whether South has an opening bid or not is a red herring to the extent that if you make the South hand ♠xx ♥Q ♦KQJx ♣AQJTxx the auction would likely have been identical.

 

North needs a way to show a strong hand with excellent ♠ and ♣ support. I am not a fan of WJS in general. I am even less of a fan of them in competition. But if you choose to play them you surely must have discussed what you are going to do with a hand which has the equivalent of a SJS. I imagine this would involve a cue-bid of ♥ on either the first or second round.

 

So I think I give the blame to North if they had a method for showing a SJS but he failed to use it, or to the partnership if they agree WJS without discussing the obvious ramifications.

[lowerline]

[hv=d=s&v=n&n=sakqxxxhjxdxckxxx&s=sxxhqdkxxxcajt9xx]133|200|Scoring: MP[/hv]

 

Our bidding went:

 

1♣ (1♥) 1♠ (Pass)

2♣ (Pass) 4♦ (Pass)

5♣ All pass

 

I made 12 tricks for +420. Of course the traveller had a set of +450s and +480s on it.

 

Who is more to blame?

 

Note: 2♠ over 1♥ would be a weak jump shift, and 3♦ over 2♣ would be 5-5 shape and game forcing.

One might blame north for his slam attempt in clubs i.s.o. going to 4♠. OTOH north might been expecting a little more from the 1♣ opening by south. I blame south who opened this 1♣.