cry over this hand with me

[Thymallus]

Having been brought up on 4 card majors and weak Nt this sort of hand makes a fool out of me more often than I'd like so advice please.

 

Playing in an indie with us vul I hold

 

♠862

♥A4

♦AQ8

♣95432

 

 

P deals and opens 1♣ the opps pass throughout

 

I assume this is a SAYC 1♣ and so this is the sort of hand I feel very uncomfortable with. I don't like raising clubs since this may be one of those 3 Club holdings in p's hands. I don't want to bid NT since I may have a good holding if p has long clubs so I compromise with

 

1♦ at least this way I will find out what p has. He answers 1♠ so I think

 

Now .. p has 5 clubs, 4 spades, I have an 8 loser hand in support of clubs so I can raise to 3 ♣ and effectively limit my hand.

 

p bids 3 N and we go off 3 for minus 300 and 8%

 

His hand was

 

♠AKJ7

♥K6

♦9632

♣QT8.

 

Much misery sets in and I stumble from one catastrophe to another. Strange thing .. last week I played this indie and came 2nd out of 300 this week after further tragedies i was 298th! so I'm overall an eventful average!

 

Perhaps I should stick to pairs.

 

So how should I have bid the hand to avoid the disaster?

[inquiry]

In an indy try to make the most descriptive bid early. That bid on this hand is 1NT. You are correct partner should have 5♣ and 4♠ for this auction (at least I would have that), but in an indy, you partner might be 3334 with three small hearts and worried about bidding 1NT with no stopper.

 

When you can describe your values and distribution with a single bid, do so. Even you nice 3C should have worked out better, as your partner has an easy pass. Why didn't he? Maybe he thought that you might think 3C was forcing. You don't know how he plays and vise-versa. Look how easy it is after 1C-1NT... all pass.

 

 

Second advantage, you get to play any NT contract. Now your unknown partner might be a superstar, but odds are he/she will not be. There is something to be said for grabbing the contract yourself if you hand is suitable (as it is here). I am not advocating distorting the bidding to try to become declarer, but when a choice of bids exist, tend to pick the one that is more likely to let you declare the hand. :-)

[Wackojack]

Since I was also brought up on 4 card majors and weak no trump, I found your post interesting. When I first tried 5 card majors I bid up the line Acol style and found it rarely got you into trouble. Now after some research I like to play 2-way check-back similar to BBO Advanced but not xyz. In reading this I have just checked BBO Basic which says that 1d after 1c may have a 4 card major. Also 1c-1d-1nt does not have any subsequent check back bids. So it would seem to me that your partner's 1s rebid was consistent with BBO Basic. It also btw says that is after 1c-1d-1NT, a bid of 3c shows 11-12 with 4 or more clubs. With good clubs and 10 points this would not be too much of a lie, but your clubs are the worst possible. Partner's next bid of 3nt doesn't look totally unreasonable. So why did this go wrong? Of course it is your first response. As Ben has said your most descriptive bid is 1NT. (BBO basic says 6-10 no 4 card major)

 

So following BBO basic would have been fine.

[kenrexford]

This hand also brings up a point somewhat missed quite frequently.

 

If you hold 3343 pattern, with a weak hand, you might try a 1♦ response because (1) natural calls are good and (2) you want the stronger hand to receive the lead. Right?

 

So, what does this reality do to the distributional expectations for 1♣-P-1NT?

 

Is it not true that 1♣-P-1NT is usually an auction where responder will end up holding four clubs, or five poor clubs?

 

In other words, partner should sniff the "good club support" that motivated your strange 1♦ response if you bid 1NT. Bidding 1♦, instead, actually caused a temporary burying of that support. When you later show club support, you over-emphasize the diamond holding and express an unbalance greater than actually held.

 

Just bid 1NT and let partner work out that you must have support for his clubs, if he has them.

[EricK]

If 1NT is the correct bid on this hand, then what do you bid if you have a small ♦ instead of the A? I can't believe that such a large range for a non-forcing space-consuming bid can be correct.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

I would have bid 3C, limit raise.

and your partner should Pass 3C.

 

There maybe better bids, but most

peoble will expect something like the

hand in question for a 3C bid.

Keep it simple.

 

The assumption that 1S from opener

shows 5-4 (or an unbal. hand) holds

only true if you respond Walsh style

to a 1C opening, and assuming that

partner knows that in an indy is ...

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

 

PS: Your partner should have passed

the 3C bid, but maybe he did believe,

that the bid was forcing.

[Wackojack]

In other words, partner should sniff the "good club support" that motivated your strange 1♦ response if you bid 1NT.  Bidding 1♦, instead, actually caused a temporary burying of that support.  When you later show club support, you over-emphasize the diamond holding and express an unbalance greater than actually held.

 

Just bid 1NT and let partner work out that you must have support for his clubs, if he has them.

I totally agree.

 

If 1NT is the correct bid on this hand, then what do you bid if you have a small ♦ instead of the A? I can't believe that such a large range for a non-forcing space-consuming bid can be correct.

 

I don't see any problem if you play 15-17 no trump. Opposite a 6-10 1NT response, partner with a balanced 12-14 will pass and with a balanced 18-19 will raise.

[Thymallus]

Thank you very much for the helpful replies. Having thought and reflected upon this I can summarise the following learning points for myself

 

1) Apply the KISS principle (Keep It Simple Stupid!) Thus when I am tempted by what seems like a clever bid I should stop and see whether there isn't something blindingly straightforward that's better!

 

2) With the SAYC 1 club bid opening a response of 1 N implies a club holding (doh , but for an acolite this is something of a revelation!)

 

3) Personally I lean over backwards to avoid bidding NT as responder and perhaps that is wrong. I should not be averse to it when it is the most descriptive bid available.

[whereagles]

If you don't know pard, it is imperative to bid NT before him. 1NT thus :D

[EricK]

If 1NT is the correct bid on this hand, then what do you bid if you have a small ♦ instead of the A? I can't believe that such a large range for a non-forcing space-consuming bid can be correct.

 

I don't see any problem if you play 15-17 no trump. Opposite a 6-10 1NT response, partner with a balanced 12-14 will pass and with a balanced 18-19 will raise.

Sometimes partner has a semi-balanced hand with 15-17 HCP. Or even an unblanced hand in that range with a singleton honour.

 

3NT doesn't require two balanced hands.

[MickyB]

If 1NT is the correct bid on this hand, then what do you bid if you have a small ♦ instead of the A? I can't believe that such a large range for a non-forcing space-consuming bid can be correct.

If opener is unbalanced, you have found a club fit. He can rebid 2♣ with, say, 11-15, leaving responder to go on if maximum; and reverse with 16+, knowing that 3♣ is likely to be a reasonable spot. Playing 14-16 NT and short club, I play this 1NT bid as 5-bad 12; it doesn't cause any problems.

[Finch]

In the last Bermuda Bowl Freeman/Nickell had the auction

 

1C P 1something P

1S P 3C all pass

 

this was a 4-3 fit and went off (a fair number off, if I recall) because

 

- opener had a 4333 distribution and wanted to show his 4-card major

- responder jumped to 3C with 3-card support expecting long clubs opposite

 

Neither of them was right, in the absolute sense, but it shows how important it is to know what partner's rebidding style is.

[HeartA]

Use Walsh style, 1C-1D-1N-p. I prefer direct 1N (1C-1N-p) response, but would blame him if my partner responds 1D.