WTF Bidding Problem

[kenrexford]

[hv=d=n&v=n&s=saq10xxhdkqxxxxxcx]133|100|Scoring: MP[/hv]

 

The sectional tournament session has been like this -- South keeps seeing insane hands back-to-back. So, you pick up this latest of typical hands.

 

Partner, dealer, opens 3♣ red-on-white. You have no agreements as to honor strength in his suit, but he is a very competent player. RHO passes. So, the concensus so far is that 3♦ cannot be all bad. You try this.

 

Shockingly, but pleasingly, LHO pipes in 3♠. Now it gets weird. Partner comes alive with an undiscussed 3NT call. RHO raises to 4♠.

 

Q1: What now? (Part II delayed)

[gwnn]

erm. X?

[Free]

6♦, 3NT in such situations should show the willingness to play 5m opposite 4M contracts.

[kenrexford]

6♦, 3NT in such situations should show the willingness to play 5m opposite 4M contracts.

Amazingly insightful call!

 

I had no surety as to what 3NT should show. It seemed to show diamond support, and the fifth spade made the void as the basis obvious. However, I was chicken and bid a simple 5♦. This at least beats the +300 or +500 for doubling 4♠.

 

The opponents came through by competing to 5♥, which is difficult to even set. This finally induced a long delay 6♦.

 

Partner held ♠ -- ♥ xxx ♦ A10x ♣ QJxxxxx. After a heart lead, the play is rather simple. Win, small club toward dummy. If LHO ducks, you later cross to dummy in trumps (splitting 2-1) and ruff out LHO's honor (they split). If he rises, you do the same maneuver, with a ruffing-finesse of clubs.

[awm]

Hmm, it really wouldn't have occurred to me that partner might bid 3NT on this hand. Usually when I bid 3♦ over 3♣, I'm either looking for a diamond slam, or concerned about some side suit for 3NT. I would think that partner's 3NT would show some side cards, not a diamond fit and no high cards in the majors. This hand seems like a clear 4♦ bid, or even 4♠ splinter.

[mike777]

6♦, 3NT in such situations should show the willingness to play 5m opposite 4M contracts.

Amazingly insightful call!

 

I had no surety as to what 3NT should show. It seemed to show diamond support, and the fifth spade made the void as the basis obvious. However, I was chicken and bid a simple 5♦. This at least beats the +300 or +500 for doubling 4♠.

 

The opponents came through by competing to 5♥, which is difficult to even set. This finally induced a long delay 6♦.

 

Partner held ♠ -- ♥ xxx ♦ A10x ♣ QJxxxxx. After a heart lead, the play is rather simple. Win, small club toward dummy. If LHO ducks, you later cross to dummy in trumps (splitting 2-1) and ruff out LHO's honor (they split). If he rises, you do the same maneuver, with a ruffing-finesse of clubs.

I really hate opening a preemptive 3 level bid with an outside Ace or King, am I alone?

[the hog]

"So, the concensus so far is that 3D cannot be all bad. You try this."

 

No way! I would be interested to know who consented to bidding 3D. My consensus is to pass 3C. I suggest you rush out and immediately buy a lottery ticket. You are amazingly lucky to find partner with this hand. My partners would probably have

♠ x ♥ xxx Dx ♣ KQJxxxxx,

allowing me to make nothing and have the opps go down in 6H.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi Ken,

 

I would have passed 3C.

 

Assuming I have bid 3D, which is forcing in my

book, I dont understand 3NT.

Undiscussed, it should show a spade stopper,

but unless my opponents are lunatics, partner

is looking at a void, ... a rather unusual stopper.

 

We are lucky, that they bid 4S, I will make

a penalty double.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[Codo]

Silly auction.

I agree with 3 Club, i don´t like outside aces, but if I wait for pure hands, I may wait too long.

I don´t agree with 3 Diamond- I would surely pass.

I don´t agree with their Spade bids having Hearts. (But they may have their bids, who can tell this without seeing the cards)

I don´t agree with 3 NT as showing anything but maximum with a spade stopper.

 

Yes I can see in my hand, that 3 NT was artifical, but I doubt that it is common sense to treat 3 NT as artifical, showing diamond support and a spade void.

 

I don´t even believe, that this is a good treatment at all.

[kenrexford]

Some of the views on this are interesting when you look at the field results. The event was A/Ax, with the B cutoff at 3000. The par result was 5♦, +620. This suggests, if 3♣ was par, that the par action was to respond 3♦.

 

The person who bid 3NT was a professional player, one who has very high regard for his bidding theory by such notables as Meckstroth and Rodwell, who in a sense trained him in his youth. I would not think of 3NT myself, and I was equally confused, but apparently this was his understanding of the "right" call, and he has the credentials to convince me that his call is worth considering as possibly accurate.

 

My main point was to inquire as to whether anyone else would consider 3NT, as I would not have prior to this auction actually occurring.

[keylime]

I'd treat 3NT as a "raise to five of a minor" and green-lighting you to sac there, i.e. advance sac'ing.

[pclayton]

Ken:

 

I don't think I like the way you've set this up here. 1st off you say that 3♦ is a 'consensus' action, and nothing could be further from the truth. Like Ron, I would pass 3♣ as catching a ♦ fit seems marginal, and we can't intelligently investigate a 5-3 spade fit either.

 

Do you know why 3N never occurred to you? Because its a ridiculous call with a void! If you held a more mainstream: xx, AKx, AKQxxxx, x, isn't 3N just what you want to hear, since there's no reason that it shouldn't be natural. Why can't pard hold: Kx, xx, Qx, KJxxxxx? With your pard's hand I'd try 4♠ I think; doesn't that send a clearer picture of the hand?

 

The fact that we hold ♠AQTxx makes 3N really suspicious, but pard cannot know that our spades are anywhere near this good.

[Robert]

Hi everyone

 

I play 3NT in preemptive auctions as offering partner a chance 'to take a view' on 5m. I play wide ranging three bids and opposite some(many?) of them 5m would be too high.

 

Since most play that 3C-3D shows a forcing bid, 3NT would be natural here.

 

Regards,

Robert

[cherdano]

If it wasn't for the colors, I would be sure 3N was a psych.

 

Anyway, I think 3N is nuts undiscussed. Also, I would guess the field action is to pass your partner's hand in 1st seat red/white, so your reasoning about par is voided.

[inquiry]

Some of the views on this are interesting when you look at the field results. The event was A/Ax, with the B cutoff at 3000. The par result was 5♦, +620. This suggests, if 3♣ was par, that the par action was to respond 3♦.

 

The person who bid 3NT was a professional player, one who has very high regard for his bidding theory by such notables as Meckstroth and Rodwell, who in a sense trained him in his youth. I would not think of 3NT myself, and I was equally confused, but apparently this was his understanding of the "right" call, and he has the credentials to convince me that his call is worth considering as possibly accurate.

 

My main point was to inquire as to whether anyone else would consider 3NT, as I would not have prior to this auction actually occurring.

I don't think most people opened your partners hand 3♣. First off, the side ace would stop some. Second the crappy suit at these colors would stop others. I think, without seeing the hand, that your RHO opened 1♥ (or maybe 2♥) and then your hand uses michaels to show spades and diamonds, five diamonds to soon follow.

 

And even if they opened 3♣ and even if your hand bids 3♦, I really, really can't see north bidding 3NT on a void. 4♠, yes, 4♦ maybe, 3NT? Not on a dare.

[kenrexford]

I agree that this auction seems insane without discussion. For what it is worth, the auction would actually be likely to go pass-pass-to me, as the 5♥ call was by my LHO. This creates a strange set of alternatives, such as what to open with this hand and what followed.

 

Given the actual auction, 3♦ is getting a bit of bad press here, IMO. If you expect partner to have seven clubs that could be as weak as QJxxxxx, as he actually held, then diamonds certainly offer a reasonable alternative of strain. Further, the three-loser hand, albeit weak, also justifies action. Finally, the glaring heart void suggests that the opponents may have a viable heart contract (4♥ would be cold). Forcing at least 4♦ by bidding 3♦ seemed sound to me.

 

Consider also the ensuing auction. If LHO had passed, several good things could happen. Partner might have diamonds (2+ or a stiff honor), where 4♦ has play. Or, perhaps partner holds three spades. If partner bids 3♥, you have an easy rebid.

 

That all being said, what about this 3NT call? I bid 5♦ in complete confusion because I also wondered about this call. It was obvious on this hand what must be occurring, but it seemed odd to me. I am glad to see that some have used 3NT as fit-showing.

 

This actually makes sense, IMO. If Opener has club length, and a critical fitting honor in diamonds, he has little room for a spade stopper. However, I might (and did). So, 3NT allows me to pass with spades stopped (and heart control). In the long run, this will seem to get us to more good 3NT contracts than requiring Opener to have spades stopped (in which case he likely lacks the missing diamond honor).

[the hog]

Ken your logic regarding bidding 3D is badly flawed. The most likely scenario is that you will attract a X in a very likely misfit. Your comment re lho passing, unless he is about to crucify your indiscretion, is a pipedream when you consider your meagre values and your pd's pre empt.

I won't comment on the 3NT bid as others have already done so.