How aggressive do you get?

[mikegill]

[hv=d=w&v=b&s=sxhaxxdkjtxxxcxxx]133|100|Scoring: IMP

P 1♦ 2♠ ?[/hv]

[Guest Jlall]

I would just bid 3D. It's hard to get too excited opposite what will often just be a weak NT.

[hotShot]

We seem to have 9+ cards in ♦, which means that opps may have 9+♠'s. I think opps will compete up to 3♠. Partner has 3-♠ than and his/our ♦ are probably worth nothing playing ♠.

So I like to put more pressure on west bidding 4♦, but with my std partner this would be RKCB in ♦ so I would have to settle with 3♦.

[inquiry]

Rare time I will disagree with Justin (at least knowingly), but this hand is too good for just bidding 3♦. I would force to game. I have been down before, but this is a ZAR monster in support of diamonds.

[pbleighton]

I agree with Ben. I bid 3S.

 

Peter

[mike777]

3s for now...pard promised 14+ yes?

[Guest Jlall]

3s for now...pard promised 14+ yes?

wtf dude? I know that you oscillate from "open all junk 11s" to "we play roth/stone" but you cannot assume whatever current non mainstream opening bid style you are currently employing is used in every post made by every person.

[mike777]

ok that is why I asked :) I assume r/s not played in Dallas. :)

[dake50]

Perfect minimum partner Sxxxx HKx DAxxx CAQJ and 6D is ok. So game force for me.

[cherdano]

Perfect minimum partner Sxxxx HKx DAxxx CAQJ and 6D is ok. So game force for me.

Brr. This is a super-perfect non-minimum.

 

Anyway, 3♦ is too pessimistic to me, I will bid 4♦ and miss 3N.

[pclayton]

3S; monster hand opposite a 1♦ opener.

 

If pard had opened 1♦ and RHO passed; I'd be torn between 2♦ and 3♠. With the overcall, I can't do less than 3♠.

[mikegill]

The aggressive bidders win here. 3NT is perfect with 9 tops, and you're not getting there unless you bid 3S. Both experts who held these cards just bid 3D at the table, and I think I agree with them. Partner is by no means guaranteed to hold the dA here, in which case game is horrible - he might not even have 4 of them. I think I would force game if the hand were x Axx AJTxxx xxx, since then at least we know one of us holds that card. To me, asking partner's likely weak NT to hold the dA, a spade stopper, a club stopper, and a fast 9th trick just seems a little much.

[Fluffy]

Surprisinly my methods, who don't let me difference between strong and weak raises in diamonds (both bid 3 clubs), might help me letting me know a bit more from opponent and partner's hand before deciding wich strenght I have.

 

Now I read mike's last post I would prabably end in 3 diamonds just with 1 more round of bidding.

[mcphee]

Does not bidding 3S show LR values or better for D? At first I felt 3D would be ok, on reconsidering I think I really have a LR hand type and would bid 3D with the A or H and 6 D to the J. There is just too much of a hand to raise to just 3D and I feel forced to show my LR values. If partner bids 3N I hope it makes, if he calls 4D I dump him there. It is close, but 3D just not enough of a push for me.

[Guest Jlall]

Does not bidding 3S show LR values or better for D?

I think most would interpret 3S as forcing to game. This is not the same as 1D-(1S)-2S where you have much more room. I with a minimum limit raise or a decent constructive raise I think you're supposed to bid 3D. With a good limit raise or better you just GF.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

one opion you have, is to use 2NT as artificial.

I wont bid 3S, this this hand is certainly not strong

enough to force to game, but if you play 2NT as

some kind of good-bad, you have the chance to

differentiate between a good and a comp. raise,

... the good raise maybe forcng, but only upto 4D.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[Winstonm]

Fortunately, the auction is not over and the final contract is not dependent upon some divine revelation about just how many tricks are available on this hand. We can give partner a description of our hand and see if he has anything left to say.

3D in this sequence should be anywhere from a good contructive raise to a bottom-ish limit raise and low and behold that is what we have.

 

IMO, to bid more than 3D is to make an assumption based on too little information and therefore take more control of the bidding than is warranted by this hand.

 

I doubt partner, holding QJx, Qxx, Qxxx, AQx, will appreciate the fine nuances of my forcing us to game with a shapely 8-count; however, if I bid 3D now and then get a chance later to bid 4D over 3S, I have done a pretty good job of describing my hand, I would think.