acbl bulletin hand

[mike777]

9753....Q52...Q8....K764

 

both vul.

 

 

1C=1S

3S!=?

 

3s!=Please assume for this post that 3s shows 4 spades and a balanced 18-19 HCP.

 

Your call and why?

[whereagles]

Just what the doctor ordered: 3NT.

 

Wouldn't be surprised to see 4♠ fail on 4 top tricks while 3NT rolls home.

[Gpm_bg]

;) I'll try 4♠ with the hope that partner hold something like :

4th♠AJ10x

2nd♥Ax

3rd♦Kxx

4th♣-AQxx

 

Parnter shouldn't have less then 3Aces, becouse such an invitations with 14-15 distrubutive pts he/she may bid directly 4♠.

He/she didn't rebid 3♦ which could be single or void ♦ and hand like 4-4-1-4 or 4-4-0-5.

As some experienced players says: The expected profit is more chancefull then expected lose here"

So i'll try with the risk that partner could have and

4th♠K109x

3rd♥Axx

2nd♦AK

4th♣A109x

[1eyedjack]

I don't see 4♠ as being the right bid. 3N is only a contract suggestion. Partner can still pull it to 4♠ if 4♠ is right. If ever there was a more No-trumpy type of hand I have yet to see it: Poor Spades and quacks in unbid suits. That is what 3N would be telling opener. Let him make a more informed decision than you as responder can ever make. To be honest I would rank Pass as second choice. I can quite easily construct hands where there is no making game. But it is a numbers racket so I bid 3N.

[neilkaz]

If you play that in this sequence 3NT is Serious 3NT suggesting slam interest then you are cannot bid 3NT as a suggestion to play.

 

I think I prefer to play 3NT here as a suggestion to play 3NT in spite of our 4-4 fit with my slow tricks and weak ♠. With slam interest I could Q at the 4 level.

 

// neilkaz //

[1eyedjack]

I sometimes play serious, but usually agree only to do so in where the auction is already GF. Not sure that there is much logic to that agreement, so may revisit my thoughts on that.

[Guest Jlall]

Opposite most people I would pass. Opposite myself I would bid 3N (my 3S bids tend to be very sound). This is a bad hand and most people would bid 3S with many hands that had 14 points and a stiff, all hands that had 15 points and a stiff, and all 5422 15/16s. Most people would bid game with 19, and with a lot of 18s. Surprised that the only discussion so far is on WHAT to bid.

[Winstonm]

Opposite most people I would pass. Opposite myself I would bid 3N (my 3S bids tend to be very sound). This is a bad hand and most people would bid 3S with many hands that had 14 points and a stiff, all hands that had 15 points and a stiff, and all 5422 15/16s. Most people would bid game with 19, and with a lot of 18s. Surprised that the only discussion so far is on WHAT to bid.

I think this is the reason - from the original post: 3s!=Please assume for this post that 3s shows 4 spades and a balanced 18-19 HCP.

 

It appears the question being asked is what to bid if partner holds 18-19 balanced and 4 spades. To that set of circumstances I would bid 3N, as the spades are bad and my holdings are the type that increase if led into across from Ax.

 

If I am just playing, I would pass 3S as the double jump support bid is the most aggressive over-bid by most players, and this collection isn't going to be worth much opposite a 4144 15-count.

[HeartA]

Yes, I voted for 3NT.

[Guest Jlall]

Sorry I missed that ;) It also says ACBL bulletin hand, I'm sure that this is not the agreement, but ok since mike wants us to live in this world where 3S shows specifically 18-19 balanced with 4 spades... I guess I would bid 3N.

[mike777]

Sorry I missed that ;) It also says ACBL bulletin hand, I'm sure that this is not the agreement, but ok since mike wants us to live in this world where 3S shows specifically 18-19 balanced with 4 spades... I guess I would bid 3N.

This time not one but both pairs are playing this agreement!

 

Thanks for the comments so far this is getting interesting! I will post the magazine comments later....

[Guest Jlall]

Sorry I missed that ;) It also says ACBL bulletin hand, I'm sure that this is not the agreement, but ok since mike wants us to live in this world where 3S shows specifically 18-19 balanced with 4 spades... I guess I would bid 3N.

This time not one but both pairs are playing this agreement!

 

Thanks for the comments so far this is getting interesting! I will post the magazine comments later....

are you sure its not "the equivalent of 18-19 balanced"?

[mike777]

Sorry I missed that ;) It also says ACBL bulletin hand, I'm sure that this is not the agreement, but ok since mike wants us to live in this world where 3S shows specifically 18-19 balanced with 4 spades... I guess I would bid 3N.

This time not one but both pairs are playing this agreement!

 

Thanks for the comments so far this is getting interesting! I will post the magazine comments later....

are you sure its not "the equivalent of 18-19 balanced"?

Thanks for asking but yes I am sure.

 

3s! promises 4 spades and a balanced 18-19 hcp.

Both Doub/Wildavsky and Weinstein/Garner are playing this on the problem.

I found this a tough problem given all of this information so I look forward to all of your comments. Ty.

[awm]

Note that on this particular auction, opener has both 3♦ and 3♥ jump-reverses available. Assuming one plays these as invitational or better with shortage in the bid suit (as is fairly common these days), there's no particular need to ever bid 3♠ on a hand with a singleton. I suppose it's possible opener holds some 4-2-2-5 hand in the 15-17 range, but a lot of people open those 1NT these days too.

 

So the agreement that "3♠ in this auction shows 18-19 balanced" is actually not that peculiar. I agree with the majority that if 3NT is suggesting a contract I will bid that, whereas if 3NT would be "serious slam interest" or the like I'll bid a somewhat unhappy 4♠ (I could easily see 4♠ failing, but avoiding game with 25-26 high and a 4-4 fit is too big a position for me to take).

[the hog]

Can't bid 3NT if that is "Serious" or "Frivolous" as the case may be. Actually I pass, this is a really bad hand.

[flytoox]

Isnt 3N kind of illogical given you responded with 1S at the first round? If you are worrying about your suit quality then why not bid 1N over pd's 1D?

 

Now I bid 4S, given I am forced to bid 1S at the first round.

[HeartA]

I don't think it's illogical to bid 3N. It offered a choice for pd. If I had bid 1NT in the first round, 4S would never be found.

[geller]

The initial problem didn't specify the scoring (or if it did I missed it, sorry), but having read to this point I assume it's matchpoints rather than imps. If that's the case pass is somewhat more attractive. (I still bid 4♠ though.) No reason to necessarily suppose 3NT is a better game contract, although obviously there are some hands where that could be the case.

 

If you really want to answer this question, get a hand-generator and deal out 100 18-19 balanced raises to 3♠ and then see which of 3♠, 4♠, or 3NT is best. (I'm too lazy to try this myself.....)

 

-Bob

[whereagles]

Surprised that the only discussion so far is on WHAT to bid.

Well, the hand is pretty bad indeed, but you do have 25-26 hcp combined. I might mastermind a pass here if I were the strong hand. Being the weak one, I prefer to simply play it straight down the middle.

[mike777]

The initial problem didn't specify the scoring (or if it did I missed it, sorry), but having read to this point I assume it's matchpoints rather than imps.  If that's the case pass is somewhat more attractive.  (I still bid 4♠ though.)  No reason to necessarily suppose 3NT is a better game contract, although obviously there are some hands where that could be the case.

 

If you really want to answer this question, get a hand-generator and deal out 100 18-19 balanced raises to 3♠ and then see which of 3♠, 4♠, or 3NT is best.  (I'm too lazy to try this myself.....)

 

-Bob

Since this is the beginner section let us assume we do not have a hand generator before we bid at the table. ;)

 

With that said we need to something to guide us, we are not world champs!

[neilkaz]

The initial problem didn't specify the scoring (or if it did I missed it, sorry), but having read to this point I assume it's matchpoints rather than imps. If that's the case pass is somewhat more attractive. (I still bid 4♠ though.) No reason to necessarily suppose 3NT is a better game contract, although obviously there are some hands where that could be the case.

 

If you really want to answer this question, get a hand-generator and deal out 100 18-19 balanced raises to 3♠ and then see which of 3♠, 4♠, or 3NT is best. (I'm too lazy to try this myself.....)

 

-Bob

Yes...but even with a hand generator you have to make a decision as to whether the 3♠ bidder will pull 3NT to 4♠ anyhow with a 4-4 fit. Simply bidding 3NT here doesn't end the auction, but says to PD that 3NT may be a better contract than 4♠.

[mikestar]

I'm a 3NT bidder here, though there is a limit to how much I'd disagree with a partner who gambled a pass, especially at match points.

 

I can see merit in hiding the horrible spades by responding 1NT and missing the 4-4 fit--which we won't miss if partner is unbalanced and strong enough to try for game, as he will bid 2♠ to show the strength and pattern out. In that case I raise spades gladly.

[neilkaz]

I'm a 3NT bidder here, though there is a limit to how much I'd disagree with a partner who gambled a pass, especially at match points.

 

I can see merit in hiding the horrible spades by responding 1NT and missing the 4-4 fit--which we won't miss if partner is unbalanced and strong enough to try for game, as he will bid 2♠ to show the strength and pattern out. In that case I raise spades gladly.

The reason to not hide even these weak ♠ here is that you are not 4333 and PD may also be slightly unbalanced and that if he invites to game you can bid 3NT to accept if you wish to give him a choice. This does risk him blasting to 4♠ when it is -1 and 3NT makes, but I still think 1♠ offers better chances both at part scores and games.

 

If PD jumps to 3NT holding 4♠ after your 1NT, perhaps it is set on a red suit lead.

 

Just my opinion and if 4333 here with these weak ♠ I'd likely call 1N.

[kenrexford]

Ditto thoughts on 3NT as bad, with some underlining.

 

IMO, the use of 3NT as a slam-approach tool in the jump-raise-of-responder's-major scenario is more important than the fine-tuning of contract. I would like to be able to offer a choice, but it seems to me that this choice must be made when electing 1♠ or 1NT, else this auction is preemted too much for the GF responder.

[awm]

If the 3♠ bid really shows 18-19 balanced with 4-card support, that's a pretty precisely described hand. I don't think there's a lot of value in having a "serious/non-serious" slam try distinction, which is mostly useful when both hands are very wide-ranging.

 

On the other hand, it's nice to be able to avoid 4♠ with a pair of 4333 hands for example, or with a variety of other hands (like lots of slow values) where 3NT will play better. Generally finding the best game should take priority over slam bidding.

 

I also disagree that offering 3NT as a choice means we should've responded 1NT initially. Take the following two hands for opener:

 

Jxxx

AKx

KJx

AQJ

 

KQJx

Kx

Kxx

AQxx

 

Both of these are reasonable 1♣ openings and 3♠ rebids, yet the first will almost always fail in 4♠ (losing 3♠+1♦ even with spades 3-2) whereas 3NT will normally make (just concede a diamond, unless spades are breaking 4-1 with AKQT in one hand and the diamond ace in the other, and they find a spade switch). On the second hand, 4♠ will often make (losing a spade and two red tricks) whereas 3NT will frequently fail on a red suit lead.

 

Bidding 1♠ and then offering 3NT shows a hand with four spades but more suited for notrump play, and allows partner to make a reasonable choice. Bidding 1NT initially takes it out of partner's hands.