KQJ983 J T432 AQ

[Elianna]

[hv=d=s&v=n&s=skqj983hjdt432caq]133|100|Scoring: MP

You're East, and the auction goes:(1♥)-pass-(2♥)-you bid 2♠;

(3♥)-pass-pass-YOUR BID[/hv]

 

Also, how clear is your bid?

[Guest Jlall]

matchpoints white/white makes us do some crazy stuff B) If there are no Xs and 3S or 3H makes and you pass you are getting a bad score even if the other is down TWO. You will never beat a contract 3 here and both contracts going down 1 when you have a hand like this, while possible, is less likely. Of course when youre going down 2 you will often get hit with a matchpoint double, but thats life. Too much upside not to bid here with a great suit and 6-4.

[mike777]

"Fight the Law"

 

Says if we have 16-18 working hcp we should make 3 spades.

[kenrexford]

I like the heart Jack too much. I'd prefer AQJxxx of spades, but...

 

Double. High offense to defense ratio, but flexible. A spade lead from a stiff, with the stiff trump Jack and a side entry, makes for good defense if partner leaves it in.

[Robert]

Hi everyone

 

3S Bridge is a bidders game and this hand screams for a 3S bid.

 

It could go wrong 'if' you have a poor pair opposite that do not play maximal doubles. That 3H bid by a decent pair merely suggests a nine card fit.

 

I make a lot of doubles, however, this hand seems much more like a 3S bid than to give partner a choice. If partner holds a stiff spade, your double may pay off, however, 'if' you double with this hand partner will be pulling on many more auctions where he should be passing for penalty.

 

With xx of spades opposite AKxxx J Kxxx Axx partner would pass a double of 3H and your side would still be taking tricks for a long while.

 

Regards,

Robert

[pbleighton]

3S is clear. How many tricks is that spade suit worth on defense?

 

Peter

[neilkaz]

This is MP and NV. 3♠ for me, and if it is set 1 while 3♥ makes I have gained.

 

If they push onward to 4♥ I'll double since if they make it at MPs I think I'm in for a poor score anyhow. Their bidding suggests that they have a 9 card fit but not enough to have good chances at game.... ie PD is marked with a trick or two.

 

.. neilkaz ..

[P_Marlowe]

I would have bid 3S direct, having choosen

2S the round before, I will pass now.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[mr1303]

Tricky. Probably 3S, but if partner's pass was slow I'd expect to lose the director's call.

[Finch]

3♠ but only because it's matchpoints.

Double makes me wince. It is asking for -530.

[1eyedjack]

3♠ but only because it's matchpoints.

Double makes me wince. It is asking for -530.

Might I just ask: what is it about IMP scoring that stops you bidding 3S?

[Guest Jlall]

3♠ but only because it's matchpoints.

Double makes me wince.  It is asking for -530.

Might I just ask: what is it about IMP scoring that stops you bidding 3S?

Not to answer for Frances but the upside of bidding is now negligible (for instance, -50 or -100 instead of -140, or +140 instead of +50 or +100) and the downside is now worse (-500 etc). At IMPS if you are going to bid 3S over 3H you should think that both 3H and 3S might make. At MP you have to consider the size of your plus or minus as well.

[1eyedjack]

3♠ but only because it's matchpoints.

Double makes me wince.  It is asking for -530.

Might I just ask: what is it about IMP scoring that stops you bidding 3S?

Not to answer for Frances but the upside of bidding is now negligible (for instance, -50 or -100 instead of -140, or +140 instead of +50 or +100) and the downside is now worse (-500 etc). At IMPS if you are going to bid 3S over 3H you should think that both 3H and 3S might make. At MP you have to consider the size of your plus or minus as well.

OK, I see what you mean, now. It was the possibility of a double partscore swing that mainly concerned me. I would expect (quite possibly in error) to get sufficiently close to 3S that they will be reluctant to double (being generally more reluctant to double into game at IMP than at MP). Anyway, I agree that there is a stronger case at MP. I just thought that the case for doing so at IMP, while weaker, was not so weak as to justify on balance it being correct to pass. But I will accept what others say on that front.