Am I supposed to bid again?

[rona_]

[hv=d=s&v=a&n=sj4hkq4d98752c832&w=sak8hat52djcqt765&e=sq73h763dkqt3ca94&s=st9652hj98da64ckj]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

West North East South

 

- - - Pass

1♣ Pass 1♦ Pass

1♥ Pass 2NT Pass

3♣ Pass Pass Pass

 

Playing sayc, I am East. I thought I already limited my hand , so what do I do after 3 clubs? bid 4? bid 3nt?...my expert partner was a little put off with my pass :) . In no way did I think 3 clubs is forcing to game in clubs or 3nt. Since I had only 11 points with a flat hand, and he showed a distributional hand, I thought pass was the best option. So I suppose this is one of those "assign the blame" posts, but please don't blame East 100% because sooner or later I will have to show West this thread. :)

 

Many thanks to all the experts that respond to questions in the B/I forum.

Rona

[jillybean]

I think the 3♣ bid over 2nt sets gf, your partner could have passed 2nt. She is showing 5♣, doesnt like NT and is asking you to pick a game. I don't like 3♣ at all and would have bid 3nt.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

3C is not forcing, it typically shows

a weak 6-4 hand, and I would have

passed as well with your hand.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[inquiry]

3♣ is not forcing in SAYC.

[bid_em_up]

3♣ is not forcing in SAYC.

Agreed. Responder has limited their hand with the 2N bid. 3C is not forward going.

[mikeh]

I blame West.

 

2N was a natural, limited invitational bid.

 

West has to be allowed to bid 3♣ to play, when west realizes that game is out of reach and his hand is ill-suited for 2N. Give West something like x AKJx Jx QJTxxx, and do we really want to be playing 2N on these cards?

 

3♣ here is a sign of weakness... not a choice of games.

 

Maybe we can construct a hand on which, opposite a responder who announces ♦ length, spade values and 10 to a bad 12 hcp, we want to offer a choice of a 9 trick notrump contract or an 11 or 12 trick ♣ contract, but I think we'd have a tough time... and it is far, far easier to construct hands on which west needs to run away from 2N.

 

Deciding whether 3♣ is best played forcing or weak is a matter of frequency of use, and degree of utility.

 

We HAVE to have it weak when we need it weak... at mps it will be critical, since all boards count equally. At imps, it is not quite as critical, but the 5-7 imps part-score swings can kill you even if you get the big decisions right.

 

When we have the strong hand, it will be both relatively infrequent, and we will usually (not always) break even in that 3N will usually work well even if 5♣ is theoretically better, and when slam is possible, we can usually bid beyond 3N (over 2N) with safety.

[jillybean]

I stand corrected, thank god for experts.

[Finch]

What mikeh said...

 

And if you have a strong hand you can bid something other then 3C.

 

3S on the sample hand's shape, for example (although on the sample hand I would also have just bid 3NT).

[Apollo81]

West gets 100% blame for not making an auto 3NT bid.

[rona_]

Great replies. Many thanks.

[han]

Agree that the onbly alternative to west's 3NT bid is 3S, which shows this shape or a 4-4-0-5(so in particular 5 clubs).

[skjaeran]

3♣ is to play, no question about that.

IMO west has an easy raise to 3NT.

3♠ should show this handtype, but a little stronger I think. Just too weak for a GF 2♥ jump reverse.