Action after 4th chair

[pclayton]

White / White, MP's

 

Pard opens 1♣ in 4th seat and RHO overcalls 1♠. You play a 12-14 NT. 2♣ is standard and 3♣ is weak.

 

[hv=s=sxxhxxdqxxxcqjtxx]133|100|[/hv]

[pbleighton]

3C seems pretty clear.

 

I'd like a singleton, but NV I'm not letting them buy it for 2S, so I bid 3 now.

 

Peter

[whereagles]

I'm bidding 2♣ + 3♣. Pard prolly has the 15-17 hand and might get happy if I bid a straight 3♣. I'm not afraid them bidding 3♠ because that will probably go down.

[Apollo81]

3♣

[Echognome]

3♣. We can hardly have a higher ODR. The only defensive card we have is the ♦Q. The two small doubletons in the majors rate to be poor assets on defense.

[mike777]

I'm bidding 2♣ + 3♣. Pard prolly has the 15-17 hand and might get happy if I bid a straight 3♣. I'm not afraid them bidding 3♠ because that will probably go down.

ditto.

[mikeh]

If we don't bid 3♣, when do we???? If partner has the 15-17, we are still almost certainly wanting to play 3♣, and when he doesn't, he has shape and let's let him in on our general hand type so that he can make the save-no save decision himself (it would help if we had agreements that allowed him, if there is room, to suggest a save, which we would decline due to our lack of stiffs/voids).

 

Bidding 2♣ will always fool partner: if we follow with 3♣, are we not sounding like a player with an 8 count or so, perhaps xx Kx Qxxx QJxxx? Isn't 2♣ the call that will get him to overbid the 15-17 or to misread our combined defensive prospects?

[whereagles]

If we don't bid 3♣, when do we????

Maybe when the hand is..?

 

x

xxx

Qxxx

QJTxx

[gwnn]

they shan't be left alone in exploring spade possibilities.

 

3♣

[mikeh]

If we don't bid 3♣, when do we????

Maybe when the hand is..?

 

x

xxx

Qxxx

QJTxx

then you are going to be waiting a long, long time before troubling the opps with preemptive raise. Not to mention the harm done to partner's image of the hand should you bid a (misleading) 2♣... whether or not you intend to bid again: see my earlier post.

[BebopKid]

3♣ and don't bid again.

[inquiry]

3♣

[cherdano]

I'm bidding 2♣ + 3♣. Pard prolly has the 15-17 hand and might get happy if I bid a straight 3♣. I'm not afraid them bidding 3♠ because that will probably go down.

If you are playing weak NT, then IMO you should have clear agreements which bids are constructive, possibly game-interested opposite the strong NT hand.

 

If you have the agreement 3♣=preemptive, 0-8, then clearly the agreement must be that partner is not allowed to bid again with a strong NT.

 

Arend

[whereagles]

whether or not you intend to bid again: see my earlier post.

Seems like we have different ideas as to what 2♣ + 3♣ shows. Guess that explains our different opinions.

[whereagles]

If you have the agreement 3♣=preemptive, 0-8, then clearly the agreement must be that partner is not allowed to bid again with a strong NT.

I firmily believe it is a strategic ERROR to bar a strong hand from bidding after 3♣. I surely want pard to bid 3NT over 3♣ with

 

AQxx

JTx

Ax

AKxx

[pclayton]

3♣. We can hardly have a higher ODR. The only defensive card we have is the ♦Q. The two small doubletons in the majors rate to be poor assets on defense.

Quacks and doubletons represent a low ODR.

[pclayton]

We are sort of fixed by a 12-14 NT on this hand. I bid 3♣ like most of you.

 

Pard held: ♠QJxx, ♥Jxx, ♦AKJ, ♣Axx. RHO holds a 5332, and won't come in over a strong NT. No one balanced with the 2=5=3=3 on my left either.

 

Making 2♠ would have been a challenge. They need to double hook I think.

 

At all other tables, our side played 1N, usually making 8 tricks since diamonds are 3-3 and the ♣K is onside.

 

I guess this is pretty unlucky, but at the time I rued my 3♣ call. I was thinking that pard is either a 15-17 or unbalanced with 5♣. With the latter, pard will compete himself, and with the former we can decide to compete or not.

 

I still like 3♣ B)

[mikeh]

If you have the agreement 3♣=preemptive, 0-8, then clearly the agreement must be that partner is not allowed to bid again with a strong NT.

I firmily believe it is a strategic ERROR to bar a strong hand from bidding after 3♣. I surely want pard to bid 3NT over 3♣ with

 

AQxx

JTx

Ax

AKxx

Your point is??? You post an prime, control laden 18 point hand in reply to a comment about 15-17 point hands????

[Echognome]

3♣.  We can hardly have a higher ODR.  The only defensive card we have is the ♦Q.  The two small doubletons in the majors rate to be poor assets on defense.

Quacks and doubletons represent a low ODR.

QJTxx in partner's suit... I expect to take several tricks on offense (including using my small doubletons as ruffing power). I expect to take 0 tricks on defense.

 

Unless opponents play in diamonds my small doubletons do not rate to take any tricks on defense.

 

My ♦Q might take a trick or be worth a trick combined with partner's holding.

 

GIVEN THE AUCTION, I rate my hand to be much more offensive than defensive.

 

Perhaps that clarifies it?

[whereagles]

Your point is??? You post an prime, control laden 18 point hand in reply to a comment about 15-17 point hands????

Hum.. well, since bidding over a weak 3♣ with the bal 15-17 clearly borders on over-exuberancy, I thought cherdano was mentioning the 18-19 hand :)

[bid_em_up]

Huh?

 

Was it not yourself said in post #3?

 

I'm bidding 2♣ + 3♣. Pard prolly has the 15-17 hand and might get happy if I bid a straight 3♣. I'm not afraid them bidding 3♠ because that will probably go down.

Now you say that bidding over a weak 3♣ with the 15-17 clearly borders on overexuberancy?

 

Your point is??? You post an prime, control laden 18 point hand in reply to a comment about 15-17 point hands????

Hum.. well, since bidding over a weak 3♣ with the bal 15-17 clearly borders on over-exuberancy, I thought cherdano was mentioning the 18-19 hand :)

Mikes point is....bidding 2C then 3C will ENCOURAGE when he holds the 15-17 hand, not discourage. The 15-17 hand should pass an immediate preemptive raise of 3C. If the 15-17 hand gets happy/overexuberant, it is their problem. Your objective should be to make the correct bid on YOUR hand. If partner gets carried away, thats their problem. If its a regular partnership, you explain why they need to pass. If its a random player, you move on knowing you made the correct bid.

 

The given hand is either a pass or 3C. Nothing else even comes close.

[whereagles]

1. Now you say that bidding over a weak 3♣ with the 15-17 clearly borders on overexuberancy?

 

2. Mikes point is....bidding 2C then 3C will ENCOURAGE when he holds the 15-17 hand, not discourage.

 

3. Your objective should be to make the correct bid on YOUR hand. If partner gets carried away, thats their problem. If its a regular partnership, you explain why they need to pass. If its a random player, you move on knowing you made the correct bid.

 

The given hand is either a pass or 3C. Nothing else even comes close.

1. Well, the fact that pard should pass with 15-17 doesn't mean he WILL pass. I should take that into consideration.

 

2. But that's because we have different views about what 2C + 3C should mean.

 

3. Sorry, but I must disagree here. The objective of bidding ISN'T to make correct bids, but to reach a good contract. If I know my pard is trigger-happy, I must be more conservative. To talk about technically correct bids is all fine and dandy but we all know we must also take pard's style into consideration when picking a bid.

 

In short, if I think 3♣ might induce pard into (incorrectly) bidding 3NT, then I should perhaps try 2♣ only. That's my point.

[bid_em_up]

3. Sorry, but I must disagree here. The objective of bidding ISN'T to make correct bids, but to reach a good contract. If I know my pard is trigger-happy, I must be more conservative. To talk about technically correct bids is all fine and dandy but we all know we must also take pard's style into consideration when picking a bid.

 

In short, if I think 3♣ might induce pard into (incorrectly) bidding 3NT, then I should perhaps try 2♣ only. That's my point.

Disagree all you wish, but.....

 

How can you expect to reach good contracts if you don't make correct bids?

 

Bidding 2C and then 3C is MORE likely to induce partner into now correctly bidding 3N. And thats my point.

[pclayton]

3. Sorry, but I must disagree here. The objective of bidding ISN'T to make correct bids, but to reach a good contract. If I know my pard is trigger-happy, I must be more conservative. To talk about technically correct bids is all fine and dandy but we all know we must also take pard's style into consideration when picking a bid.

 

In short, if I think 3♣ might induce pard into (incorrectly) bidding 3NT, then I should perhaps try 2♣ only. That's my point.

Disagree all you wish, but.....

 

How can you expect to reach good contracts if you don't make correct bids?

 

Bidding 2C and then 3C is MORE likely to induce partner into now correctly bidding 3N. And thats my point.

Bid-em - what auction are you referring to?

 

Why would pard try 3N after you've balanced with 3♣?

 

(I think) Whereagles is referring to:

 

p - p - p - 1♣

1♠ - 2♣ - 2♠ - p

p - 3♣ - p ?

 

Inconceviable that pard would re-evaluate and try 3N now....

 

(As a side note, we play a double by the opener in a sequence like:

 

p - p - p - 1♣

1♠ - 2♣ - 2♠ - double

 

as cooperative, showing the balanced 15-17)

[whereagles]

How can you expect to reach good contracts if you don't make correct bids?

Because the right bid isn't always the correct one :)