1NT-2H-2S...?

[kgr]

[hv=d=s&v=n&n=sqt876h65dj965ca5&s=skj9hakqda87ct743]133|200|Scoring: IMP

1NT-(p)-2H-(p)

2S-(p)-P-(3C)

p-(p)-3D-(p)

3S-All pass

[/hv]

Pick-up partnership. Which of the above bids you like least and who should have done more?

I was sitting North and didn't bid after 2S because I hadn't enough in case of misfit. Is that to pessimistic and should I have assumed a fit (vulnerable I probably would have bid more).

[Codo]

I doubt that many established partnerships had bid this better then you did.

The crutial part is how to show the fit and maximum? I see no way to do this, so I ahd been satisfied with my 170 even vul.

[Gpm_bg]

i would try 2nt rebid after 2♠, 3♦ should be GF, 2NT could be even 5-4 to be taken as invite 7-9 pts with 5th♠.

 

depends of constribution of ♥ in ops you can hide ♣loser and to try finese on ♦T to dummy, but at all many opinios could be gave at open cards. I just want to say that will bid one more time with weak hand

[whereagles]

You should double instead of 3♦. Your side has bucketloads of points, there's no guarantee of a fit, and you can live with pard passing, pulling it out to 3♦ or 3♠.

[Finch]

I agree double of 3C looks the normal call.

I have no problem with not being in game, it will go off quite a lot of the time.

[AdiBichea]

Hi,

 

1NT - (p) - 2♥ - (p)

2♠ - (p) - P - (3♣)

P - (p) - 3♦ - (p)

3♠ - (p) - 4♠

 

it's clear, part has 3x♠, why?

i like to belive, no one oppen NT with 2 doubletons .. with this distribution 2♠ - x♥ - 2♦ - x♣

so if my part have 3♦ is better to pass in fit 4-3, not to bid 3♠ in fit 5-2. I am right or not?

then i bid 4♠, i have ♣Ax a nice color, ♥ doubleton, but bad ♦ ... so if i look again at the hand i pressume my part could lose 1 trick in each color, but where's my part. points?

 

Regards, Adi Bichea [bil member], an intermediate opinion!

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

unlucky.

In my regular we would have missed

game as well, although I prefer a dbl

instead of the 3D bid.

 

If you had hold 4 spades and only 3

clubs, it may have been possible to find

the game, since you could have bid

an super accept with 2NT, showing

4 card support, max. values and 4-3-3-3

shape, but this would assume a firm

understanding what the srveral super

accepts mean.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[awm]

It's often difficult to find game with a balanced 17 opposite 7. The issue is that if you invite on 7, you'll also get to game when opener has 16, and when opener has 17 without a good fitting hand. In general signing off (barring a super-accept) is the right action even though you occasionally do miss a game this way.

 

However, the opponents have give you an additional chance. Over the 3♦ bid by north, I think opener should bid game. After all I'd expect something like QTxxx xx KJxxx x to be more typical for the 3♦ call and game is actually quite good opposite this.

 

Of course, double might be a better bid with the north cards. Still reasonable to bid 4♠ over double though, since south is very maximum and has a fit.

[SoTired]

I dbl 3C. We have at least an ace more than opps. How will they take 9 tricks to our 4 without a great club fit?

 

If I wimped out and bid 3D, I still pass over opener's 3S.

 

Should opener bid 4S over 3D? No, because responder could be much weaker.

 

These 2 hands fit perfectly and are both 100% maximum for previous action. If you worry about missing this game, then you will get to too many games that have no chances.

[neilkaz]

Opener has no idea that responder has an absolote max for his pass, but with a flat hand and 4 ♣ and 17 HCP, I think opener should double the 3♣ balance.

 

This doesn't insist that 3♣x be defended at all costs, but is a strong suggestion to defend and likely not a minimum.

 

After responder's 3♦, I think opener can do more than just bid 3♠. I'd bid 3♥ which really cannot be wanting to play in ♥ after responder has shown at least 9 cards in the pointed suits. 3♥ has to be a game try and it is the only inbetween bid. Or, opener can realize that responder wouldn't balance 3♦ with a min and can hope for a useful honor in responder's hand in ♦ along with ♣ ruffs (hopefully not tapping) and a pitch on the ♥ AKQ and just bid 4♠.

 

As responder, I have 7 HCP and 2 doubletons, but I think I am 1 HCP too light to invite with 2NT as we may get to unmakeable games, and 2NT or 3S may be in danger opposite a 15 HCP opener.

 

Responder's 3♦ balance after passing 1 round most definately is not GF.

 

I do feel that opener's 3♠ bid is too timid and still would X the opp 3♣ balance. How much does 3♣x rate to be set by ? Usually 2 tricks, and if 3 tricks it even outscores a speculative game.

 

.. neilkaz ..

[kenrexford]

I dislike the 2♠ call. With good three-card support and four rippers on the side, I make 3NT opposite A10xxx in spades and out about 50% of the time (minus a rare fifth club trick for them). Add the spade Queen, a six-count, or a side Ace, and...

 

This hand type is why I now have been using 2NT as a maxi 3-piece super accept. Sure, I might play 3♠ down one for a poor result, but...

[ArcLight]

I see opponents frequently making horrible overcalls or balancing bids.

 

If you always bid over them, then you get set more often and it just encourages them to frequetly interfere.

 

BUT

 

If you penalty double them for 300 or 500 in a part score hand, it will give them pause and help protect your other auctions.

 

 

If you can get away with bidding 3 ♣ with QJTxx and an outside ace and king at the 3 level, going for 100, then why not bid all the time? Whats the downside? -100 instead of -110 or -170? But when the opps start doubling you, then -300 or worse is far less attractive

[pclayton]

Pretty normal, but I like a double by N too. Looks like 3♣ hammered isn't much fun.

[mikeh]

I don't fault any of the calls, including 3♦, altho that is clearly the most questionable.

 

For south to double 3♣ is lunacy... while partner has rights (maybe) he should play opener for VERY good ♣: Ax KQxx Kxx AJ9x is perhaps an over-statement of the hand expectation, but certainly this is an easy double, which one would not want partner to pull on almost any hand...

 

 

It is obviously (I think) N's job to double if double be correct, and there is a good argument that it is. At mps, double seems worth 100, with 3♦ 80 and pass 20. At imps, pass gets heavily promoted (maybe to 50 or 40...still a bad bid and an error) while I think it is really close between double and 3♦...to the point that while double is probably superior, 3♦ is not an error.

 

As for S, he has no right to bid game over 3♦.... responder passed 2♠ (quite properly) and thus should NOT be placed in the position of havng to pass 3♣ on some weak 5-5 because of fear that partner may now play him for invitational values..... Give N Q1098x x Q108xx xx...we'd all bid 3♦ wouldn't we?

[HeartA]

I would dbl 3C as well.

[keylime]

I'm spanking 3C so firmly knowing that I am leading trumps at every chance.

[cherdano]

As for S, he has no right to bid game over 3♦.... responder passed 2♠ (quite properly) and thus should NOT be placed in the position of havng to pass 3♣ on some weak 5-5 because of fear that partner may now play him for invitational values..... Give N Q1098x x Q108xx xx...we'd all bid 3♦ wouldn't we?

Maybe South could make a 3♥ trial bid, though. I don't think this can be anything else than a hand with fit that improved and could make game opposite a sub-invite hand with no club wastage.

 

Arend

[lowerline]

With a fit and a maximum south could (should?) have bid 3♠ after the 3♣ by east... I don't think there is another reasonable way to end up in 4♠.

 

Steven