mikegill Posted January 21, 2007 Report Share Posted January 21, 2007 [hv=d=s&v=e&s=s73hada532ct97643]133|100|Scoring: MPP 1H 1N P? [/hv] Your choices are: Bid 2C, forcing 2D, then bid 3C, invitational with 6, tending to be fewer HCP than a quantitative inviteBid 3NBid 2N (xfer to clubs) and pass 3CBid 2N and then bid 3N, showing a 2245 slam try (obviously not a slam try here since you're a PH)Bid 2N then 4D, which shows this shape exactly and a GFBid 2S, asking partner if he's max or min, and play 2N/3N accordingly partner's 1NT overcall could be on a good 14-count at these colors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winstonm Posted January 21, 2007 Report Share Posted January 21, 2007 I don't think this hand is as good as it looks - one entry will surely be knocked out on opening lead, meaning partner needs to have huge club fit. I don't want to play 3C opposite Qx as support, and I don't want to invite in such a bad club suit so that partner overvaluates Kx support. I think because a plus score should be OK at MPs, I will take an option not presented and simply pass 1N - 7 tricks should be easier to come by than 9 of anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted January 21, 2007 Report Share Posted January 21, 2007 3NT. We probably have 2 heart stoppers and our lack of tenaces suggests finesses through opener, which are likely to suceed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pbleighton Posted January 21, 2007 Report Share Posted January 21, 2007 Pass. 3NT is close. Peter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pclayton Posted January 21, 2007 Report Share Posted January 21, 2007 Looks like Keri over 1N overcalls? Interesting . I'll invite with this via 2♣ / 3♣. If pard has prime club cards, 3N could be excellent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jlall Posted January 22, 2007 Report Share Posted January 22, 2007 I would bid 3N opposite a normal 1N overcall. Since 1N could be on a 14 count *cringe* I'll try 2S. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
temp3600 Posted January 22, 2007 Report Share Posted January 22, 2007 I would go with the first choice, 2♣ - 2♦ - 3♣. It tells partner his club holding is the key to 3NT, which is exactly what I want to convey. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianshark Posted January 22, 2007 Report Share Posted January 22, 2007 My gut says to ask partner to play in 3♣. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keylime Posted January 22, 2007 Report Share Posted January 22, 2007 I'd go through the invite sequence myself, 2c-2d-3c. Pard needs good clubs to bring 3NT home. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted January 22, 2007 Report Share Posted January 22, 2007 I don't understand why Winston and Justin think 1NT/2NT might play better than 3C. I'd bid 2C-3C. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcphee Posted January 22, 2007 Report Share Posted January 22, 2007 I am going to play 3C via the invitational route or 3N and need C help. At least 3 card help as AQor AK alone is no good with H lead. Come on pard!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted January 22, 2007 Report Share Posted January 22, 2007 Why is everybody making a club invite with that anemic suit? This sort of invite is supposed to be based on a semisolid suit (e.g. KQxxxx or AJTxxx) and little else, not on any length + hcp. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikegill Posted January 22, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 22, 2007 Yes, the 3C invite tends to be on a hand like that. Opener will bid 3NT freely on a hand like Axxx Axx Axx Kxx or something similar (obviously he can't have that here). In fact, that may be one of the problems with this bid - because partner is missing two aces, he will be unwilling to bid 3NT even with a good club fit, since he's worried he doesn't have enough immediate tricks. Give him KQT Kxx Kxxx KQJ, and he's gonna be worried that even if he has 6 clubs and 1 heart, he doesn't have time to get enough diamonds or spades before they get the hearts going. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jlall Posted January 22, 2007 Report Share Posted January 22, 2007 I don't understand why Winston and Justin think 1NT/2NT might play better than 3C. I'd bid 2C-3C. *shrug* feels like NT. We have some heart help and might take some diamond tricks. If partner doesn't have a club fit we could still take a lot of tricks in NT (eg, AJx KQx KQxxx Jx). Also inviting in NT will get partner to evaluate incorrectly, opposite a random 17 with no club fit I would want to be in 3N. Also 120/150>110 :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halo Posted January 22, 2007 Report Share Posted January 22, 2007 3NT If partner's got 14 points, then maybe we are already in trouble versus 1H passed out, -100/-200. I don't like the idea of telling partner I have a club invite with poor points on this hand. My second choice would be play in 3C, where I may do better than NT part scores. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apollo81 Posted January 22, 2007 Report Share Posted January 22, 2007 Partner should not be overcalling 1NT after a major opening with 14 pts. Im making the normal bid which is to game force and if this is too high then it's pard's fault. Given the options, either 3NT or 2NT....3NT seems fine. It does feel like NT but the second sequence might be better. Passing 1NT? inviting in clubs? LOL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awm Posted January 22, 2007 Report Share Posted January 22, 2007 I'll go with 2♠ (asking max or min). This hand is not a particularly good 8 hcp, despite the aces. It's relatively easy to attack the entries (in fact opponents will likely kill one of them on the opening lead) and there are a lot of issues if partner doesn't have a good club fit. I don't generally hold with the school of "every 23 hcp combined is worth a 3NT bid" and consider that this hand is substantially worse than something like: xxxAxxxKJTxxx which is a reasonable game force. While 3♣ might be a better partial than 2NT, I don't particularly want partner getting all excited with ♣Kx and fairly minimum values thinking that "the clubs will run." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ohioply Posted January 22, 2007 Report Share Posted January 22, 2007 pass-hand feels like crap to me. Clubs are not very good and with one of my entrys likely gone on first trick partner will probably not be able to establish them. Eight hcp does not an invite make for me. we're only in the 23-25hcp range I'd like at least J109xxx clubs before I invite. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeh Posted January 22, 2007 Report Share Posted January 22, 2007 Every choice, including pass, is flawed, which is why this is a problem :) Pass: wrong if we can make 130/120 or can make game. Correct if we can make 120/110 or 90 Invite showing ♣s: correct if partner has the 'right' ♣ holding: Kxx or Axx might be enough and AQx is almost surely enough. Correct also if we play 3♣ making 130/120. Wrong if partner misevaluates for ♣s, either by overbidding (thinking Ax or Kx is enough as it will be opposite a 'book' invitational sequence) or if we end up in 3♣ either down or 110 opposite 120. Force to game: correct if the invite would get partner passing when game makes: see Justin's example with KQxxx in♦ with Jx in ♣s. Break even with invite when partner accepts... whether or not 3N makes. Loses when game fails...loses immediately to pass and loses to the invite route when partner would successfully pass 3♣. I am not going to invite: it is wrong too often: we may miss a cold 3N while failing in 3♣ on a 4-1 trump break opposite xx. Partner will often mis-evaluate, so the invite lacks the usual upside of involving partner. I am a strong advocate of inviting partner to the dance when I don't know what to do... but I have no way of describing this hand.... in particular, no way of telling him that I need REAL help in ♣s. Add to that the prospect of going down in 3♣ with 9 winners in notrump, and the middle-of-the-road bid is merely positioning myself (poorly) for the post-mortem. I pass at mps and imps nv and bid 3N, with confidence, red at imps. None of the other posted options carry any attraction for me at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halo Posted January 22, 2007 Report Share Posted January 22, 2007 This is MPs. You are passing. Could work - don't understand the doomy 'nothing else appeals'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeh Posted January 22, 2007 Report Share Posted January 22, 2007 This is MPs. You are passing. Could work - don't understand the doomy 'nothing else appeals'.Other options included showing a gf 2245... I don't hold this shape so why bid this way? If I'm going to force to game, which is an overbid that I would perpetrate in some circumstances, why add to the distortion? Another option was to simply ask if partner were min or max.. yet with my hand, some minimums make for a decent game if vul at imps... AJx Kxx KJxx Kxx.. on a ♥ lead I need 2-2♣s with the A onside... not too terrible at imps... Kxx Kxx Kxx AQxx.... looks like a wonderful game to me, yet this is a sterile minimum...unless opener expects 6 ♣ tricks.... and so on. A third unattractive option was to signoff in 3♣. This has one way to win: 3♣ outscores 1N: a very unlikely situation... As I wrote earlier, this hand is of a type that I do not think I can usefully describe to partner, so I have to make the decision. With partner possibly holding 14 hcp (which I truly dislike), pass seems most likely to get us a decent mp score. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted January 22, 2007 Report Share Posted January 22, 2007 3nt...geez I almost opened this hand in first seat. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the hog Posted January 23, 2007 Report Share Posted January 23, 2007 Didn't we have a thread recently where someone suggested 1NT on a good 14 count? I thought this was shown to be a very foolish action. I bid to play in 3C and change the system after this round. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianshark Posted January 23, 2007 Report Share Posted January 23, 2007 I don't think the clubs can be established, therefore yes, you do rate to make 2/3 more tricks in clubs than you would in NT. And I don't think I'm making 11 in clubs or 9 in NT, so that's why I sign-off in 3♣. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winstonm Posted January 23, 2007 Report Share Posted January 23, 2007 I don't understand why Winston and Justin think 1NT/2NT might play better than 3C. I'd bid 2C-3C.Partner has advertised some kind of heart cards, so there are wasted values there, making my heart ruffing control of less value. Unless partner has pretty good clubs, I could easily have 3/4 club losers. It could easily be a hand - and just as easily not be - a hand where 7-8 tricks in NT is the max but 3 clubs fails by a trick. And like Justin said, even if it is a hand where 3N makes, because it is MPs you score better at +150 than +110. And even +120 is better than +110. In order to avoid a low scoring board, a club contract has to be totally right while NT only needs to be partially right. BTW, change the hand to xx, Ax, Axx, 10xxxxx and I'd be much more prone to an invite to 3NT even with the poor club suit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.