is it a trap?

[jdonn]

Ax AQ87 KQJ9 AQJ, 4th seat, imps, vul against not.

 

1♠ p p X

2♠ p p X

p 3♦ p ??

 

(No agreement about strength of 3♦ or what 2NT by partner would have been or anything like that, none of it is anything special.)

[mike777]

Ax AQ87 KQJ9 AQJ, 4th seat, imps, vul against not.

 

1♠ p p X

2♠ p p X

p 3♦ p ??

 

(No agreement about strength of 3♦ or what 2NT by partner would have been or anything like that, none of it is anything special.)

3S

[kenrexford]

I agree about 3♠. Here's why, though:

 

Partner has shown me almost nothing. He certainly has not promised the diamond Ace.

 

I did not bid 2NT after 2♠, so I'm not simply balanced.

 

I must like his diamond call.

 

If partner has the spade Qx, even, he should get the picture and try 3NT.

 

If partner has nothing of use in spades, but the diamond Ace is in his hand, he knows that I asked him to bid 3NT when I was not looking at that diamond Ace. So, it seems that the diamond Ace is as good as the spade control.

 

Or so it seems to me, maybe.

[mikeh]

I sure as heck hope he doesn't bid 3N on Qx of ♠s... not unless I can persuade opener to lead out of turn

[awm]

It's a trap! Run away! Pass quickly before it's tooo late....

[Guest Jlall]

I think this is not even close to thinking about bidding. Where are you going? What tricks will you take?

[mikeh]

It IS possible that a conservative partner could hold, say, xxx J9x Axxxx xx and we make 5♦ (note how I gave us the ♥9, so we could unblock and hook against responder's 10xxx) but that is extraordinarily remote, given that some might bid 4♦ with that hand over the second double and, even for those whoo would not, other, weaker hands are much more common.

 

 

While I disagree with Justin about thinking about bidding (I certainly thought about it, and when I first looked at it, was going to bid 3♠ almost reflexively) I do agree that passing is the smarter move. And while at golf I can never make myself take the thinking player's shot, I can sometimes manage it at bridge...so I pass.

 

BTW, I have almost always had very good results by passing in this and analagous situations...partners rarely have the 'magic' hands that would warrant bidding on.... but isn't the pass here inconsistent with aggression in the recent thread featuring KQJx void AKxxx AKxx? Especially since we are on this post chasing a vul. game (the contract we most stretch to reach) while on the other it is a slam, which is never better than 50-50 in terms of desirability... and on that hand far, far worse because of the significant risk both that the 5-level was unsafe and that slam could be going for a doubled number?

[Guest Jlall]

It IS possible that a conservative partner could hold, say, xxx J9x Axxxx xx and we make 5♦ (note how I gave us the ♥9, so we could unblock and hook against responder's 10xxx) but that is extraordinarily remote, given that some might bid 4♦ with that hand over the second double and, even for those whoo would not, other, weaker hands are much more common.

 

 

While I disagree with Justin about thinking about bidding (I certainly thought about it, and when I first looked at it, was going to bid 3♠ almost reflexively) I do agree that passing is the smarter move. And while at golf I can never make myself take the thinking player's shot, I can sometimes manage it at bridge...so I pass.

 

BTW, I have almost always had very good results by passing in this and analagous situations...partners rarely have the 'magic' hands that would warrant bidding on.... but isn't the pass here inconsistent with aggression in the recent thread featuring KQJx void AKxxx AKxx? Especially since we are on this post chasing a vul. game (the contract we most stretch to reach) while on the other it is a slam, which is never better than 50-50 in terms of desirability... and on that hand far, far worse because of the significant risk both that the 5-level was unsafe and that slam could be going for a doubled number?

If partner has the A fifth of diamonds I'm pretty sure you'd want to be in 3N (except when he has good hearts as well) as LHO just gets owned on the run of the diamonds. Still if he pitches correctly and smoothly he will be down to a stiff king and we'll have to guess it, but opps rarely if ever do that.

 

Anyways, playing partner for A fifth of diamonds is really big, and you still wouldnt get to 3N unless you just up and bid it. I would honestly be completely shocked if bidding either 3S or 3N was a long term winnr.

[kenrexford]

I sure as heck hope he doesn't bid 3N on Qx of ♠s... not unless I can persuade opener to lead out of turn

Oops! Oh yeah. LOL

[kenrexford]

This question begs another question.

 

If you will not convert 3♦ to 3NT or 3♠, then you doubled planning to pass 3♦. The same would be the case for 3♣. I'm not sure what the plan is after 3♥, but...

 

Is the second double the best alternative?

 

What would...

1♠-P-P-X-

2♠-P-P-2NT

...show?

 

1♠-P-P-2NT would typically show about 19-21, I'm assuming.

 

With a simple 16-19 balanced, are you bidding 2NT now, after 2♠ and a pass from partner? Or, would you pass unless takeout-like, in which case you'd double?

 

So, what is 2NT after a passed advancer? It seems like a really big bid, but I have never seen it, discussed it, read about it, whatever. I have no idea.

 

But, it seems like a really big bid.

 

If it is a realy big bid, balanced and all, then that seems to work rather well. If partner has Axxxx in diamonds, he can raise to 3NT. If he has a second spade stop and a smattering, he can raise. If he has four or five hearts, whatever you have agreed to play in an auction I have never seen, discussed, read about, or whatever, the system you have in this sequence to distinguish heart length, works great!

[Guest Jlall]

The problem with this hand as I see it is the usual HCP guides don't apply. We can easily have 27 HCP and not make game. This often happens when we have one stopper in the opps long suit and they have an entry. I really don't want to play 2N or 3N on this hand on most hands where partner will pass or bid 3N. I am happy to play 3D.

[kenrexford]

The problem with this hand as I see it is the usual HCP guides don't apply. We can easily have 27 HCP and not make game. This often happens when we have one stopper in the opps long suit and they have an entry. I really don't want to play 2N or 3N on this hand on most hands where partner will pass or bid 3N. I am happy to play 3D.

Fair point.

 

But, out of curiosity, what the Heck does 1♠-P-P-X-2♠-P-P-2NT show?

[Guest Jlall]

The problem with this hand as I see it is the usual HCP guides don't apply. We can easily have 27 HCP and not make game. This often happens when we have one stopper in the opps long suit and they have an entry. I really don't want to play 2N or 3N on this hand on most hands where partner will pass or bid 3N. I am happy to play 3D.

Fair point.

 

But, out of curiosity, what the Heck does 1♠-P-P-X-2♠-P-P-2NT show?

No idea, a big problem stems from the common 11-15 balancing range. If I had a balanced 18 count I would not feel comfortable passing out 2S, partner could easily pass with like 8 points since I may have an unbalanced 9 count. The balancing range is so huge over 1S. Another big problem is that balancing auctions and ranges are not discussed much in bridge literature. I am beginning to see the wisdom in an 11-17 range over 1S, but that carries with it it's own problems of course. I guess it's just an inherently bad auction since you need to get in there on such a wide range of hands.

[cherdano]

But, out of curiosity, what the Heck does 1♠-P-P-X-2♠-P-P-2NT show?

It shows whatever you agreed X-then-2N to show :( Over 1S, this should be stronger than a direct 2N (I think). E.g. 1N = 11-16, 2N=17-19, X-then-2N=20-22. But I have no idea what is standard, I have seen all of 15-18, 16-18, 17-19, 18-20 claimed to be standard for 1S-2N...

[foo]

The problem with this hand as I see it is the usual HCP guides don't apply. We can easily have 27 HCP and not make game. This often happens when we have one stopper in the opps long suit and they have an entry. I really don't want to play 2N or 3N on this hand on most hands where partner will pass or bid 3N. I am happy to play 3D.

Fair point.

 

But, out of curiosity, what the Heck does 1♠-P-P-X-2♠-P-P-2N show?

The SA definitions:

1♠-pa-pa-1N= 11-16

1♠-pa-pa-2N= 19-20

1♠-pa-pa-X intending to rebid 2N= 17-18

(but this last may assume Advancer bids)

 

In the exact sequence given, I'd say X, then 2N says "I can count 8 tricks. Raise to 3N if you have a good card."

 

 

With the OP hand: Ax AQ87 KQJ9 AQJ

This 23 (!) count is outside all those boxes.

 

I don't know how much of a moose you have to have to X then keep going over Their continuing action and pd's refusal to chime in, but whatever it is, you have it.

 

OTOH, it's not clear to me that any NT rebid is appropriate on =this= board.

X again. Maybe even a 3rd time if you have to.

 

We are not getting rich defending 2S Red @ IMPs.

[jdonn]

Foo I can't tell from your post what you bid lol. Or are you saying you disagree with the prior bidding.

[foo]

Foo I can't tell from your post what you bid lol. Or are you saying you disagree with the prior bidding.

I like the sequence thus far. What I don't like are my current choices opposite a pd who could have no more than 40-12-23= 4 HCP.

 

Any game except 5♦ in a super fit with shortness in the rounded's rates to fail. But 3♦ is not paying as well as 2♠X going down or Game.

[Guest Jlall]

What I don't like are my current choices opposite a pd who could have no more than 40-12-23= 4 HCP.

you sure about that?

[jdonn]

Foo I STILL can't tell what you are bidding lol.

[Free]

Pass seems pretty clear imo.

[Fluffy]

I had a similar hand before, opener had opened with a 6-6-6 (6 spades, 6 clubs, 6 hcp), and we had slam.

 

Daddy said 3♦ was positive because lebensohl applied, but that option didn't cross my mind at all.

 

 

Depends on agreements, but if lebenshol is an option I wanna try 3♠

[Codo]

If Lebensohl does not apply I will be a real man and make the macho bid of pass.

And I believe you must be kind of macho to pass with this hand. Or was it a maso? I always mix these up...

 

Macho and Maso are not part of my english dictionary, so hopefully these expresions are universal.

[foo]

What I don't like are my current choices opposite a pd who could have no more than 40-12-23= 4 HCP.

you sure about that?

Well, since

♠Ax♥AQ87♦KQJ9♣AQJ is 23 HCP

and Opener's minimum is usually 11-12 for this sequence that leaves only 4-5 HCP at most for pd.

 

Unless...

 

Justin, are you implying that Opener psyched?

 

They are @ Favorable. Give Opener 6+S and say, a Weak Two that they've decided to mess with Our head with by bidding it via the slow route, and We will have a b*tch of a time fielding this w/o specialized agreements.

(Which most pairs tend not to play anymore. Psyches being considerably rarer than they used to be.)

 

...and Fluffy, 3♦ is not that forward going. I've told pd to bid 2x in this auction while promising 4 ♥'s and appropriate values. My 2nd X doesn't have to be this good, but it darn sure is not a 7 loser =1444 minimum.

...and all pd could do was dredge up a minimum response.

[cherdano]

foo is great

[Finch]

We were told up front that 2NT was undiscussed.

 

Obviously if 2NT would have been lebensohl, as it is in my regular partnerships, we would not pass. If I do decide to bid on, I would bid 3NT not 3S. I have already expressed doubt about playing in NT by doubling twice, rather than bidding NT on either round, and if 3NT is making at all, it's far more likely to be making with us as declarer - just give partner J10x, Qx or even Jxx in spades (J10 doubleton might do it if opener doesn't have the 9 of spades). We must also have some type of diamond support for 3NT because we haven't bid our own suit, though admittedly probably only 3, not KQJx

 

In short, I think it close between pass and 3NT. I wouldn't bid 3S.