3 d

[navit]

I opened with 1 H . LHO bid 1S / My partner bid 3D. My RHO then bid 3S. Please explain

 

the bidding. What does My partner's 3D mean. Hoe many D and points? I thought it

 

meant 6-10 points and 7 points. What does opponents 3S mean.

 

I had only 1 D so after 3 S I passed . On the next round my parner bid 4 D . I then bid 5

D. The contract was 5 D and we went down 1. I had 5 H,2S, 5 C AND 1 D .

 

When the hand were revealed I saw my partner had 8 D and 7HCP. Shouldn't she have

 

bid 4 D directly after 3S instead of 3D

 

Thanks

[1eyedjack]

I do not know what is standard. I do know that there are a lot of different treatments that players use here, many of them reasonably popular. To employ the bid at all without discussing the meaning in advance is a recipe for disaster.

 

Probably the most popular treatment (does that make it standard?) in my locality is for 3D to promise both Diamonds and support for opener, forcing to opener's suit but not GF.

 

With an undiscussed partner I would not even be confident that 4D would be interpreted correctly. The surest way of showing the hand without misunderstanding is to start by passing over 1S and then bid Diamonds later, assuming you get the chance. It lacks preemptive effect, but you can't have everything if you have not discussed the sequence.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

simple answer, 3D shows what you have agreed before hand.

 

The standard way to show a weak hand with a long suit, is

to make a neg. X followed by bidding the suit.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[jtfanclub]

I opened with 1 H . LHO bid 1S / My partner bid 3D. My RHO then bid 3S. Please explain

 

the bidding. What does My partner's 3D mean. Hoe many D and points? I thought it

 

meant 6-10 points and 7 points. What does opponents 3S mean.

 

I had only 1 D so after 3 S I passed . On the next round my parner bid 4 D . I then bid 5

D. The contract was 5 D and we went down 1. I had 5 H,2S, 5 C AND 1 D .

 

When the hand were revealed I saw my partner had 8 D and 7HCP. Shouldn't she have

 

bid 4 D directly after 3S instead of 3D

 

Thanks

The way I play it, he's setting up a forcing pass situation- he should have one sure defensive trick and no fear of playing 5♦

 

Suppose the bidding had gone....

 

1♥-1♠-3♦-3♠

P--P--4♦-P

P--4♠-P--P

 

You would now be forced to bid, while over a more mundane

1♥-1♠-4♦-4♠

 

you'd probably pass, giving your partner an impossible choice. A less complicated way to think of it is 4♦ directly is trying to prevent them from bidding 4♠, while bidding 3♦ followed by 4♦ is daring them to do so...he's not afraid of 4♠, because if you can't double it, he can sacrifice over it for less than they'd make at 3♠.

 

It's very rare that you'd be better off at 5♦ than letting your opponents play at 3♠, but this was one of those hands. Even with a singleton diamond, you still went down 1 for 50 or 100, while 3♠ making by them was 140. So, unless 3♠ was going down, his bid was a good one.

 

I'm not sure what you thought his bid meant that you bid 5♦. He'd made one nonforcing bid already, so it can't be more than an invite. It doesn't sound like you had the sort of hand that would accept an invitation. But even so, it was a good result.

 

Wasn't it?